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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (65593)	9/5/2002 8:13:28 AM
From: Fred Levine	Respond to of 70976

OT OT Harmad-- >> but allowing Saddam to violate the cease-fire agreement is, IMO, a major step backwards. Is that a cease fire agreement ? Or a Security Council resolution ?<< My memory is that the Iraqi generals met with Shwartzkopf and agreed to these terms. In addition, subsequent editorials stated that the Iraqis were dumbfounded that the terms of the cease fire were so lenient. Most likely, Bush allowed them to remain intact in order to be a counterweight to Iran. fred