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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (153572)	10/17/2002 6:47:10 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580270

Ted, <we got interwined with Saddam in the 80s not because he was controversial. We got embroiled/intertwined with Saddam in the 80s because we wanted Iran put down.> That seems pretty damn controversial to me. In fact, we did a lot of controversial things because of the Cold War, and one of them was supporting Saddam Insane because of Iran's relation with the Soviet Union. It's just like in South Korea, where America supported a brutal dictator (Chun Do Hwan) to contain the North. <Whether its a person or a nation that plays like that, it usually comes back to haunt that person or nation.> No question about it. No one is arguing that it was a good idea to support these bozos during the Cold War. The only thing was whether the alternative (allow the Ayatollah or Kim Il Sung or whoever to have a free reign) would have been worse. Either way, you're screwed, hence the controversy. <What's the hard line? War with N. Korea?> I don't know. North Korea seems more interested in selling their weapons than using them. But I would not doubt their willingness to sell a nuke to a member of Al Qaeda. And that in itself would be a good enough reason to invade North Korea. Tenchusatsu