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: Alighieri who wrote (160381)	2/8/2003 7:10:51 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579233

Al Re..This is a distortion. Turkey is an accomplice of the US in the attack. Turkey is not in a defensive posture, it is in the offensive position in war it reluctantly joined. Are you so sure of that, that you want to bet your country on it. AFAIK Turkey is just renting some forward bases as a staging area, for US troops. Turkey has offered no troops, planes or ordinance of any kind. So what is offensive about that. What is offensive, is that Germany and France are going to parse words forever, to keep Turkey from getting the help promised in the NATO treaty,thereby forcing Turkey to chose them, not the usual way, by bribing them,such as Iraq did to France; but by compromising Turkeys national security. An you call the US pushy. What makes you think the US can't pull some of the 70,000 US troops in Germany out, on its own, with its own equipment, effectively negating the their actions. And what makes you think Rumsfeld isn't capable of doing some parsing of his own. So, the original question I posed, wasn't if Germany could do it, but rather if it was worth risking NATO over it. See above. The charter only applies to defensive action, not aggressive action. What is going on in Iraq has nothing to do with Nato. Thanks for agreeing with me. That is exactly what I said. What is going on in Iraq has nothing to do with NATO, and therefore NATO has no legal right to block help for Turkey if the war spills over the border. ;;you would know that he spoke of an AlQueda camp, in Northern Iraq, Kurdish land, outside of Saddam's control, fixed in place, brick and mortar, The camp is in northern Iraq, and Saddam controls certain areas of northern Iraq. No one knows if Saddam does or doesn't control the area the mobile labs are on. What is known is that Al Qaeda controls the terrorist group in the area of the land, and Powell knows that Saddam has connections with Al Qaeda. In fact Powell went through some of the connections in his speech. Are you calling Powell a liar. Over 90% of the congress and senate agree with Powell. Are you also calling them stupid. In fact, one of congresses most diehard paeaceniks, Corzine agrees with Powell. Every democratic challenger agrees with Powell. Are they stupid also. What does that say about our own intelligence when our closest ally has to resort to plagiarism? I am not sure what that would say about your intelligence, but it didn't say anything about mine. Because it is so flimsy, it would not get through the door of a courthouse, let alone be admissible. And you want to bet your life that, because one piece was copied from a book, that Saddam doesn't have WMD, and you feel safe with that.