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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (171392)	10/2/2002 2:17:52 AM
From: NITT	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

RE"PS... About history. This country has never been the aggressor, we've always responded to others aggression (sometimes with a bit of political spin for justification)." Well, the nut running Iraq invaded a friend of the US in 1990, got his ass kicked back to Baghdad by a UN backed, US lead coalition force. The terms of the cease-fire that was signed by the Iraqi govt included a verified disarmament. This agreement also avoided the complete destruction of all military targets and forces in Iraq. The big problem is the Iraqi government has played a shell game since. I hope things do not lead to a war with Iraq, but if not for the Bush administration and Tony Blair threatening another ass kicking, Saddam would not even be considering inspectors. The bottom line is, this is not about inspections, it is about a verified disarmament. The problem for Saddam with a verified disarmament is that he will have less of a defense against his own people. The only thing that gets Saddam to capitulate is his fear of losing power. He knows we can dismantle what he has in a matter of weeks, what he does not know for sure is if we have the will. Once he knows the US and the world has the will, he will capitulate again. The idiot anti war demonstrators in this county don’t understand the chess game being played. Saddam holds the cards that would avoid a war, not Bush. Saddam can chose the keep playing, or he can throw in his hand and play nice… his choice, and the terms he agreed to over 10 years ago. Nitt

To: Road Walker who wrote (171392)	10/2/2002 6:36:10 AM
From: John F. Dowd	Respond to of 186894

John: We are not the aggressor. Some times it is better to hunt then be the hunted. Get the lion or bear in his den. We have never fought a war oour soil since the Civil War and why invite another WTC episode so we can have a smoking gun. Iraq spelled Suddam is a destabilizing force in the mid-East and therefore is a big reason for the $30 oil which is not good for our recovery. Yes I think this is all about oil just like desert storm was. Back to your comment about aggressor. Your history is lacking here. How do you think we got the land to build the Panama Canal? We saved the Panamanians from themselves as well as Columbia. Let us not invite another Pearl Harbor just so we can motivate the public. We can get him now before he has the bomb or we can wait till he has it and then what do we do tell him to be careful. This is a new world disorder and we would be better advised to get rid of the Hitler's of our age peremptorily. History shows us what problems arise when we sit by and do nothing. The words of Neville Chamberlain "Peace in our time" should ring in everyone's ears. JFD

To: Road Walker who wrote (171392)	10/3/2002 2:51:48 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

John, There was a lot of interventions that did not have much of a justification after the end of Cold War (anything during cold war can be excused to be within the long running war). Here is the list off the top of my head: Panama Iraq 1 Somalia Haiti Bosnia Yugoslavia/Kosovo Afghanistan 1 (lobbing cruise missiles) Sudan Afghanistan 2 The bolded actions are fully justified, IMO, the rest are questionable. So if the US attacks Iraq, we are not really breaking any new ground. Joe