Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (40059)	8/26/2002 4:49:21 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi CobaltBlue; Re the big attack on Iraq. Here's some more information (i.e. facts that are not filtered through people that have an intention on giving you a deliberately skewed estimate as to whether or not the US is getting ready for a massive attack, as opposed to opinions) that you may want to consider: Secretary Rumsfeld at Fort Hood Town Hall Meeting DoD DefenseLINK web site, August 21, 2002 ... Q: I'm Sergeant -- (inaudible) -- 282 Field Artillery, First Team. Sir, my question to you is, the selective reenlistment bonuses just went away. And in order to main -- to -- excuse me -- to maintain the force, I thought that that was an important part of keeping soldiers and making soldiers want to stay in the Army. Is there any plan to bring that back, sir? Rumsfeld: ... I am advised that with respect to the bonuses you're referring to, that they are phased in and out depending on the recruitment needs at a given moment. And that, therefore, I can't really answer the question as to whether or not they will be phased back in because it will be a function of what actually happens with recruitment, as I understand it. ... defenselink.mil Maybe all this looks like preparation for war to you, but it sure doesn't look that way to me. Before Bush can begin hostilities, he needs to have justification. That's what Cheney is about. They're not trying (rather unsuccessfully) to justify a conflict that they've already started. -- Carl P.S. The above link also includes a question by an artilleryman about the Crusader, and further justification from Rumsfeld as to why they cancelled the project. Basically, the administration doesn't see us in combat against any real powers in the future. "We looked at, for example, a series of battlefields and tried to figure out where would you use it and where might you use something better. The people in Afghanistan, for example, had the Crusader been available, General Franks said he could not have used it. The terrain -- it was high, it was 5,000 to 15,000 feet high, it was steep. And it was not something that you could have gotten in there in a safe way, unloaded, and then moved at those weights across into a battle zone."

To: Ilaine who wrote (40059)	8/26/2002 4:51:18 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Remind me again what supplies the 8,000 American troops in Jordan are "resupplying"? -g-