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 (153668)	10/20/2002 2:05:50 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1580611

Stalin turned out to be much worse than Hitler and Saddam has turned out to be much worse than Iran. Stalin killed more people but he had more years, and at least he was restrained enough not to invade any major powers (although that may have been to the possibility of a nuclear response, if so the net effect of nuclear weapons so far would have been to save a lot of people's lives). Iraq has been worse then a contained Iran has been but if Iran had run all over Iraq things might have been worse. If Iran didn't run all over Iraq then Iraq probably would have been just as bad as it actually has been. The only way you get less danger to the rest of the world is if Iran and Iraq where in a bloody stalemate for a lot longer then they actually were and then you would have had a lot of death. Tim