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: JohnM who wrote (47915)	9/29/2002 4:09:13 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Pollack puts oil policy in the center of considerations. If it wasn't for Oil, we would have been treating the ME like we treat Africa, and Israel would be running the whole place. However, the "The Government takes their orders from Exxon" crowd is wrong.

To: JohnM who wrote (47915)	9/29/2002 7:15:38 PM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

" Saddam gains much greater control of the oil market ". Hi John. The problem I'm having with this position is : Should not the countries who are going to be threatened by this dilemma of Saddam trying to take control of the oil be more concerned than what they display? I mean, If I were running Saudi Arabia, Libya, Kuwait or Iran etc, I would want Saddam taken out of the picture if these were my concerns. Does the “ Fish Guy “ address this? Thanks, KC