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: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (147799)	9/18/2002 10:20:45 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Iran is reforming itself - it is becoming more democratic every day, and free and democratic nations are rarely an aggressive threat to anyone. It will take time, but constructive engagement of Iran is the best course. We will and should continue to pressure them on support for terrorists, but economic ties and patience will allow the quiet, democratic revolution there to reach its conclusion and that problem will get fixed. Greater stability in the region, including peace, security and freedom for Palestine and Israel, will speed things along. The way things look to me, Iran does not need to worry about being the next target. JMO, Bob

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (147799)	9/19/2002 10:23:29 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

<<After Sept. 11, 2001, a further thaw looked possible because both Iran and the United States opposed the Taliban government in Afghanistan. But in January, President Bush named Iran, Iraq and North Korea in what he called an "axis of evil." Kharrazi said Iranians were "shocked" by the characterization.>> Glenn -- you must understand that discussions of "regime change" extend throughout the region. The idea is that you get Iraq first, then Iran, then Syria -- etc. The whole concept of the international order is threatened by the idea that we are about to give ourselves the right to invade other countries and dictate the terms by which they will be governed. We provided military support to Iraq to go after Iran in an attempt to change their regime (a war which killed a million people) and we provided support to the Iraqi "opposition" later on to try to kill Saddam. That was the "old" policy. The new policy is to go in ourselves, invade other countries and knock off their leaders, then install "deomocratic" governments. The controversy over Iraq extends well beyond Iraq.