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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. T. who wrote (147289)	9/11/2002 2:59:48 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

"Saddam does pose a threat to America's oil supply" -- that is our primary national interest and our motivation for taking action.

To: E. T. who wrote (147289)	9/12/2002 9:17:01 PM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

>> It's more complicated than that, and Saddam does pose a threat to America's oil supply << hah! iraq witholds oil shipments to the united states all the time. we get along just fine without their oil. >> A couple well placed nukes at Saudi oil facilities and poof $100 a barrel oil, << another poor argument. you cannot build nuclear weapons without someone knowing about it. especially the israelis, who have a vested interest in making sure their enemy saddam doesn't acquire nukes. the israelis already bombed a nuclear reactor in iraq back in 1981 so its obvious the israelis won't stand for saddam getting nukes. neither would iran. you don't see israel or iran attacking saddam do you? that's because he doesn't have nukes and any expert will tell you this. it's all just a bunch of propaganda and hypothetical scare- tactics in an attempt to try to justify a pre-emptive attack on iraq who has done nothing to directly or overtly threaten the united states. saddam has had chemical and bio weapons for decades, so that is nothing new. if he were about to get nuclear capability the israelis would take them out like they did in '81. saddam was not foolish enough to use chemical weapons back in the gulf war and has not threatened his neighbors since. sorry but all the hypothetical scare-tactic arguments don't hold water and the whole world sees right through it. that is why there is no support for this war except from israel and a reluctant britain.