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: Bill Harmond who wrote (148265)	9/30/2002 10:05:13 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164687

"The point here is that the US didn't need a pretext for taking the battle to the North. The North had unilaterally engaged the South in war years before the Gulf of Tonkin affair, and we had been actively engaged in the South trying to repel them." I can see why you did not pursue a career in foreign service. There is a world of difference between providing military assistance to a government -- we do that all over the world all the time -- versus going to war, invading a country and trying to overturn its leadership. We were not combatants in Vietnam until we found the right pretext -- and it is generally accepted that we made up the pretext. Stormin Norman S. did a television interview recently where he said he thought the US should go into Iraq only through the UN. He compared Iraq to Vietnam and said the worst thing would be to go in on a phony pretext as we did in Vietnam because it creates serious problems with troop morale. You live in a fantasy world Bill.