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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (26736)	1/2/2003 9:26:24 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74559

<The odds are that his own army is not willing to have all of their "toys" broken defending his regime.> Hawk, Nor their lives. But it's going to take the USA to move in, because no Iraqi in their right mind is going to be first to take on Saddam. As soon as the USA offers a pathway to freedom for anyone prepared to be a turncoat, and offers a swanky new United Nations or Iraq Mark II uniform, a pay increase, a lump sum signing bonus and better still, much less chance of being killed, I can't imagine who would want to stay on Saddam's side [other than his most intimate supporters]. The key would be to offer amnesty to all but those directly implicated in Saddam's murderous realm [much like the Nazis were all foregiven other than those tried and executed - one even going on to being boss of the United Nations which was an unpleasant outcome = Kurt Waldheim]. Watching the big USA buildup must be unsettling for those charged with defending Saddam. If I was one of them, I'd be looking for a way out, without being too active in defending Saddam, other than as a necessary means of defending myself. If the USA goes in shooting and killing in bulk, and I was being shot at, with no means of surrender or joining the good guys, I'd accept that I might as well kill as many Americans or those on their side as I could before they killed me. I dare say the USA military is not so stupid as to force people to fight instead of surrendering. But that might be the case. My guess is that the surrender rate will be faster and more benign than any conflict since the Italians surrendered en masse in WWII. My father said they were decent people who wanted no part of the fighting. He said one Kiwi soldier could guard hundreds of Italian prisoners. Sometimes the Italians would try to surrender but be told, "Sorry we're full. Carry on down the road that way and see if you can find somebody else to surrender to". He said that to relieve the burden, the Italians would carry the guns of the guards. That was not the story with German prisoners. They did not surrender unless there was no way out. They needed to be guarded with a good ratio of armed soldiers with an ever-watchful eye. I think the Iraqis are like the Italians and just want to have an enjoyable life with families. They aren't out to follow Saddam's rule-the-world fantasies. Confronting Saddam is going to be a net economic benefit for the world and especially for the Iraqis. It will show other malevolent people that they had better be circumspect about attacking the USA or supporting murder of civilians [as Iraq is apparently doing in Israel - even if only as a means to help reduce pressure on themselves by keeping conflict at a high level in Palestine/Israel]. 2003 should be another excellent year for the good things to continue to develop. Terrorists are reduced to murdering a few doctors in a Yemeni hospital, bombing some tourists in Bali and failing to light a shoe bomb - what a joke that was and showed how hopeless they are. Even the video of silly Osama with the rocks behind him was a joke. It seemed obvious to me that those rocks would be an excellent locator beacon and sure enough, geologists pointed out just where they were. The next video had a blanket to cover the background. What clowns! They hit the jackpot once with some boxcutters and some stupid airlines and security people who cluelessly left the stable door open. How it didn't occur to them that having cockpit doors open to hundreds of psychotic passengers is beyond me. The continuing absurd focus on airlines is daft. Nobody with a boxcutter or even a pistol is going to be able to hijack another large aircraft. Swarms of passengers will be burying them in duty free bottles, bags, pillows, blankets, belts and fist. With the cockpit door shut and a crazed co-pilot swinging the fire axe at anyone poking their head in, there won't be many people able to get near the controls. I'm looking forwards to an excellent 2003. 3 years into the Y2K Greatest Bubble Burst Ever and the world is on an even keel, though the ride has been viciously bumpy for individuals and individual companies, and fatal in many instances. Mqurice

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (26736)	1/3/2003 1:23:38 AM
From: elmatador	Respond to of 74559

Hawk has a point , Jay. There isn't any possibility of an 1995 Plazza Accord. Truth is: USD must devalue. But against what? Not against the Euro nor against Yen. A 30% USD devaluation is a 30% HK Dollar devaluation. USD devaluing is oil devaluing and devaluing of all commodities the majority of them priced in USD.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (26736)	1/3/2003 1:29:28 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

HOwe about a "diluted" USD devaluation with the appreciation of a basket of currencies China, Thailand, Malaysia, Brazil, Indonesia, Hungary, Czech, Poland, Russia ... With the parities: USD Euro USD Yen USD UK Pound USD Sing$ USD Aussie dollar USD Canadian loonie kept the same as today.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (26736)	1/3/2003 6:49:29 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Hello Ron, <<The dollars ... severely oversold, as are most US markets>> For 2003, I am betting you are wrong, or rather, I am wagering you are once again not correct:0) Subject 53084 <<But it appears we're headed for a nice rally into February>> … is predictable and in fact, was Message 18278958 , but samo samo for the rally's end;0) <<... bloodless victory in Iraq as pressure mounts amongst Arab states for Hussein to step down and seek exile>> … this state of affairs, if it happens, would indeed be bullish, for investors wanting to buy more gold. Should this state materialize, gold will tank, and then rise once more, phoenix like, because Saddam had nothing to do with the bubble, its demise, the market clearing and toxic purging process, or, as a matter of fact, much of anything else. Let us not mistaken the solution to seemingly intractable problems with the second helping of the Goldilocks’ economic porridge. This state of affairs would be very bearish for Asian markets, particularly Japan and Korea, because the next fight to be picked would be N.Korea. So, let us watch and maybe we get to see. Chugs, Jay