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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (150500)	8/27/2002 6:28:34 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1584974

then we would have faced off against his full army and probably have had to keep at least 100,000 people in Saudi full time maybe till this day or even later. Why? Has it occurred to you that oil might have been as available as it is today? During the first oil embargo by the OPEC, in the early 70s, it became quickly apparent also to the OPEC that they needed our money as we did their oil. How long did it last. What as the lasting effect...insignificant. Saddam still sells as much oil as we allow him to and some we don't ...in any case, it would have been the entire world that would have had a problem, not just the US. As it turns out, the Saudis and Japan financed Desert Storm. The first to remain in power, and some say illegitimally....and the latter to preserve their oil supply. It was some 300 of our kids that fought and died out there. Not a single Japanese casualty that I can remember. Al

To: TimF who wrote (150500)	8/28/2002 1:00:54 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584974

Ted I was talking about 1991. Al apparently thinks that it would have been a good idea to let Saddam keep Kuwait, and why would it have been so rediculous for Saddam to have attacked Saudi back then? If we didn't intervene then it would not have been that hard for him. If we did intervene but not attack then we would have faced off against his full army and probably have had to keep at least 100,000 people in Saudi full time maybe till this day or even later. Tim, first, I knew you were talking about 1991. Secondly, its one thing to attack Kuwait but its another to attack the Saudis. The whole world would go nuts. Sodom is not that stupid. Thirdly, this arrangement we have with the Saudis once again compromises who we are. The Saudis are not much better than the Taliban. Its not unusual to be able to watch someone on your lunch hour have their hand cut off for stealing or their head for selling drugs......kind of like lunch hour entertainment. Saudi Arabia literally is a kingdom which in many ways the people are not much more than indentured servants. Many of the working class Saudis actually admire bin Laden because he has stood up to the monarchy. This is who we are sleeping with.........frankly, its not my choice of a bed partner. I don't see how stopping a hostile dictator from taking over a big chunk of the world's oil supply is a "shit war" its defending out national interest. Do you honestly think he would have gotten that far? If so, I really don't want to argue the point. All I can say is if the Saudis feel they are in that much danger, let them put together their own army. I am sure someone thinks are arrangement with the Saudis is great. And I don't have a problem with good neighbors and all that stuff. But with the Saudis, we are in a dependent relationship in which we are the ones more in need. David Ray thinks Clinton showed the world we were weak because he didn't knock Sodom around. I think we look weak because we have these dependent relationships like with the Saudis. The whole world knows we are not strong enough to cut back our life style and reduce our dependency on oil..........and its why I think we don't get much respect. Just before Bush's meeting today with one of the monarchy, the Saudis reiterated that they were against an invasion of Iraq. You know there is no love lost between myself and Mr. Bush, but how insulting to him. He didn't even have a chance to present his case. Now, he may have deserved it for some other slight of his but I still thought it stunk. Whatever! ted