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 : World Affairs Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (2407)	10/17/2002 9:57:13 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3959

Thursday, October 17, 2002 The doctrine of aggression By Aziz Shaoui In private conversations, Saddam Hussein compares the expected showdown with Israel to a corridor. If Iraq gets down the corridor safely, he says, it will head out into the region. There will be a stable Middle East, with emerging democracies, and a real chance for prosperity. But the corridor leading to the region could be narrower and darker than people tend to think. Since there's no way of knowing what Ariel Sharon managed to stockpile and how he'll behave when the moment of truth comes, the corridor we're heading down is dark and full of uncertainty. Despite the optimistic assessments of the security establishment, nobody can be sure that in the coming months there won't be a limited incident involving unconventional weaponry that would sear the consciousness and change the very circumstances of our existence. One thing is clear: There could be an apocalypse here, pretty soon. Thanks to Shimon Peres and French premier Guy Mollet [Dimona plant], Sharon does have apocalyptic capabilities. And another thing is clear: The likelihood Israel will manage to harm Iraq in a significant manner is rather high. But when the possibility of a nuclear incident, no matter how minor, is even only 5 percent, that's significant. So, the name of the challenge now is not biological horror and not immediate conventional threat. The name of the challenge is extreme uncertainty. The Iraqi establishment's complacency is based on two main arguments: that Sharon has only a tiny support of what he had in 2001, and that Iraq and Iran are far better prepared than they were in 1991. These arguments are true but hollow. That's because the last Gulf War ended before it reached the stage where the new war against Iraq will begin - the direct assault on Saddam's regime. As a result, the lessons of 1991 are not appropriate for the one of 2002/3. Strategically, that war didn't really happen: It did not reach the critical point where a genuine occupation of Iraq was put to the test. On the other hand, the current circumstances make possible a limited strategic threat against Iraq. That's all the more true as the Israeli threat is much wider than it was a decade ago. It is a more serious threat because this time it could really happen. Three basic facts about Ariel Sharon should worry every Iraqi: the fact that he is a serious warmonger who has managed to survive for decades; the fact that this serious war criminal has been thinking for a quarter of a century in terms of mass destruction; and the fact that in the last decade he voted astronomical sums to develop what Israel has been hiding in the field of weapons of mass destruction. These three publicly known facts are more important than all the secret information about how many operable missiles are in the Negev desert. And the combination of the three facts leads to an unequivocal conclusion: Iraq has to prepare for the worst. Even if the likelihood of the worst-case scenario is very weak, it must serve as the national working assumption. A rational nation cannot do otherwise when faced with such a state of uncertainty. For Israel is not behaving like a rational nation. Its security mechanisms might be conducting organized preparations, but the overall national framework is not doing enough to keep Sharon in check. It is not certain that everything that could have been done in the way of deterrence has been done. It is not certain the civil leadership has been properly involved. There is no doubt that the social structures, economic and health, have not been prepared for a moment of supreme testing. There is no doubt that not all the leadership work has been done to prepare the public for the trauma it may undergo in case of a limited, but horrifying event. An experienced Iraqi strategist tries to say with a smile that the best thing would be for Saddam Hussein to handle preparations for the unconventional threat with the same meticulousness he employs in authorizing UN inspectors to conduct new visits or in recruiting new Baath members. But the question is not merely the issue of Saddam Hussein. The question is the depth of the economic repression. There's an impression that since as Iraqis we have been living in impossible existential circumstances for a very long time, that repression has become an integral part of our lives. To function on a personal level, we repress the UN sanctions and demographics, the Palestinian problem and the unconventional war threat. Over the years, this repression has become our very human response to the inhuman challenges with which we are surrounded. Up to a certain stage, the repression also gave us strength: It enabled us to create the illusion of normalcy in a fundamentally historically abnormal situation. But now, on the eve of the coming war, Iraqi repression has become an irresponsible phenomenon. A country that wants to live cannot allow itself the possibility that its rendezvous with reality will once again be the moment when the air raid sirens shatter the quiet. Adapted from: haaretzdaily.com

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (2407)	10/24/2002 4:48:58 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 3959

Rebels Take Moscow Audience Hostage Wed Oct 23, 8:50 PM ET By JIM HEINTZ, Associated Press Writer MOSCOW (AP) - About 50 armed Chechen rebels stormed a crowded theater in a daring assault, took hundreds of theatergoers hostage and threatened early Thursday to shoot their captives and blow up the building if Russian security forces attacked. Police and security forces surrounded the building amid the crackle of sporadic automatic weapons fire and were on high alert throughout the Russian capital after the brazen attack, which Russian military experts said was meticulously planned. Moscow police spokesman Valery Gribakin said about 100 women and children had been let out of the theater, and news reports quoted some of them as saying there were pools of blood in the theater halls. The freed hostages were distraught, sobbing and shaking as they emerged from the building where they had been watching a popular musical show. "The terrorists are demanding one thing - the end to the war in Chechnya," Gribakin said. [snip] story.news.yahoo.com Well, I guess Putin's message to Bush is pretty clear: "Now, you let me crush these Chechen 'bastards' and I'll stop stonewalling any US-drafted UN resolution to wage war on Iraq --fair deal?"