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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (6109)	2/7/2003 12:11:23 AM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

<<< Von Sponeck is adamant that from his own experience, and that of Denis Halliday before him, it is clear that the US and the UK "systematically tried to prevent us from briefing the Security Council", on the full impact of sanctions in Iraq. "This is really not speculation, this is first-hand information," he warns. "Even when I had resigned and the secretary- general, encouraged by the French, the Russians, by the Malaysians, by the Chinese, [asked] for me to come and brief the Security Council, the British and the Americans tried to prevent that. They didn't want to hear what we had to say -- what I had to say at the time -- about the conditions." >>> nonviolence.org

To: Thomas M. who wrote (6109)	2/7/2003 12:46:41 AM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 25898

THE US POLICY ON IRAQ (SPECIAL SECTION) More than 13,000 US academics oppose a US invasion of Iraq (Source: Sydney Morning Herald, 2 November 02) More than 13,000 United States academics have signed an open letter opposing a US invasion of Iraq, arguing that President George Bush has failed to make his case for war. In the letter, on the internet at: noiraqattack.org, the scholars say Mr. Bush has failed to demonstrate a credible threat from Iraq's President Saddam Hussein, failed to mobilise an international coalition in support of its aims, and even failed to persuade some of its own supporters of the merit of such a step. "The decision to go to war should have the clear support of the US Congress, the Secretary of State, and the commanding officers of the armed forces," they argue. "The likelihood of a high cost in lives of both combatants and non-combatants is too great given the weak justifications that have been offered for an invasion." The signatories went on to suggest that the mooted invasion risked increasing regional and global instability by raising tensions between Israel and the Palestinians, boosting the popular appeal of radical Islamist movements, and increasing anti-US sentiment, among other things. "As educators and scholars we hope our message sparks informed discussion on- and off-campus that reaches to Washington DC," they conclude. The letter was the idea of a geology lecturer at the University of Minnesota who passed it around to a few colleagues and got it published on September 17 in the university paper, the Minnesota Daily. The letter was later posted on the internet by someone at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and by the beginning of November contained nearly 30,000 signatures. inesglobal.org