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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: foundation who wrote (5739)	2/12/2003 7:59:51 AM
From: foundation	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12246

Present at . . . What? By Thomas L. Friedman The tension that is now rising within the Western alliance, NATO and the U.N. over how to deal with Iraq is deeply disturbing. It raises fears that the postwar security system, which stabilized the world for 50 years, could come unglued if America intervenes alone in Iraq. At the birth of this security system, Secretary of State Dean Acheson wrote a memoir titled "Present at the Creation." Can we deal with Iraq and still ensure that Secretary of State Colin Powell's memoir is not titled "Present at the Destruction"? Yes, we can — if we, the Russians, the Chinese and the French all take a deep breath, understand our common interests and pursue them with a little more common sense and a little less bluster. That means the Bush hawks need to realize they cannot achieve their ultimate aim of disarming and transforming Iraq without maximum international legitimacy. And the Euro-doves need to realize they cannot achieve their aims of a peaceful solution in Iraq and preserving the U.N. and the whole multilateral order without a credible threat of force against Saddam Hussein. Let's start with the Bush hawks. The first rule of any Iraq invasion is the pottery store rule: You break it, you own it. We break Iraq, we own Iraq — and we own the primary responsibility for rebuilding a country of 23 million people that has more in common with Yugoslavia than with any other Arab nation. I am among those who believe this is a job worth doing, both for what it could do to liberate Iraqis from a terrible tyranny and to stimulate reform elsewhere in the Arab world. But it is worth doing only if we can do it right. And the only way we can do it right is if we can see it through, which will take years. And the only way we can see it through is if we have the maximum allies and U.N. legitimacy. We don't need a broad coalition to break Iraq. We can do that ourselves. But we do need a broad coalition to rebuild Iraq, so that the American taxpayer and Army do not have to bear that full burden or be exposed alone at the heart of the Arab-Muslim world. President Bush, if he alienates the allies from going to war — the part we can do alone — is depriving himself of allies for the peace — the part where we'll need all the friends we can get. No question — Saddam never would have let the U.N. inspectors back in had President Bush not unilaterally threatened force. But if Mr. Bush keeps conveying to China, France and Russia that he really doesn't care what they think and will go to war anyway, their impulse will be to never come along and just remain free riders. The allies also have a willful blind spot. There is no way their preferred outcome, a peaceful solution, can come about unless Saddam is faced with a credible, unified threat of force. The French and others know that, and therefore their refusal to present Saddam with a threat only guarantees U.S. unilateralism and undermines the very U.N. structure that is the best vehicle for their managing U.S. power. We need a compromise. We need to say to the French, Russians and Chinese that we'll stand down for a few more weeks and give Saddam one last chance to comply with the U.N. disarmament demands — provided they agree now that if Saddam does not fully comply they will have the U.N. authorize the use of force. If war proves inevitable, it must be seen as the product of an international decision, not an American whim. The timing cannot be determined by the weather or the need to use troops just because they are there. You cannot launch a war this important now simply because it's going to be hot later. I would gladly trade a four-week delay today for four years of allied support after a war. I would much prefer a hot, legitimate, U.N.-approved war with the world on our side to a cool, less legitimate war that leaves us owning Iraq by ourselves. France, China and Russia have to get serious, but so do we. The Bush talk that we can fight this war with just a "coalition of the willing" — meaning Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia — is dangerous nonsense. There is only one coalition that matters to the average American and average world citizen. It is one approved by the U.N. and NATO. We may not be able to garner it, but we need to be doing everything we can — everything — to try before we go to war. Why? Because there is no war we can't win by ourselves, but there is no nation we can rebuild by ourselves — especially Iraq. nytimes.com

To: foundation who wrote (5739)	2/12/2003 12:38:28 PM
From: Neeka	Respond to of 12246

Bin Laden is a real nut case if he thinks people are going to put him on the same pedestal as God. Ordering humans to martyr themselves at the foot of his alter, and embrace his obsessions. What a damned cowboy. He really is looking more and more the fool...especially when he threatens rulers of ME countries. He must think he is one powerful dude making these threats, and believing everyone is shaking in their boots scurrying to grant his every wish? I can't begin to explain the mental illness that consumes him. You would think after Afghanistan that he would have learned his lesson, but alas he even pretends to be able to defend against sophisticated US weaponry, and tells all the little people how it's done. What a joke this man has become. Does he not realize that his forces (what a misnomer that is LOL) have been scattered to the wind. That his followers are a disorganized mish mash of idiots? What is it with people who feel important to idiots? Rational individuals realize that people just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace. To worship a kind and charitable God. Then along comes this rich, aggressive, narrow minded jerk with his own little vendettas, ordering people around like some kind of despotic tyrant full of illusions of grandeur. Reminds me of Hitler. I have to admit, by golly, that it did work there for awhile. He convinced 20 idiots to bomb America. Too bad for him that humanity, including most Muslims, have condemned him for his horrible brutality, his insanity, and equate him not with God, but with the worlds most hated men. He is an idiot seed who attracts other idiot seeds. Pretty much everyone just wishes that he and his idiot ideas would disappear. A lot of people are grateful that the US is willing to take on the thankless job. Reene seems to have fallen into a cynical trap writing little stories to make herself feel better about her obsession. At least she doesn't put out the call to murder and martyr, or put herself on the same God like level that binny does.......at least not in public. M@wonderifreeneisgoingtobuyducttape.??? albawaba.com Bin Laden calls all Muslims to fight with Iraq against America 12-02-2003 An audio recording said to be the voice of Osama bin Laden called for Muslims to stage suicide attacks and join the Iraqi regime in any war against the United States. Washington immediately seized upon the message as evidence that bin Laden's al-Qaeda network had a "common cause" with Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein. The Al-Jazeera Arab television network broadcast the message it said was from bin Laden. The speaker called on Muslims "especially in Iraq, to launch a jihad (holy war) against such an unjust campaign. "We stress the importance of martyrdom operations against the enemy, these attacks that have scared Americans and Israelis like never before," he said. "We advise about the importance of drawing the enemy into long, close and exhausting fighting, taking advantage of camouflaged positions in plains, farms, mountains and cities," the voice said. The speaker urged the Iraqis to draw the Americans into urban combat, saying "the thing that the enemy fears the most is to fight a city war." The speaker also told Iraqis not to worry about U.S. smart bombs and laser-guided weapons because "they work on only the clear, obvious targets." He encouraged Iraqis to use deception techniques to neutralize American technological superiority. "All those who cooperate with the Americans against Iraq are hostile to Islam," said the speaker, adding that any Muslim regime which supports the United States would be declared to have abandoned the faith. He also issued a fatwa (an Islamic decree), in which he said it would be acceptable for Muslims to fight alongside Saddam's "socialist apostates" against "the Crusaders." In the tape, the purported bin Laden warns the governments of Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Yemen not to assist Washington in its "crusade" against Baghdad. Commenting on Bin Laden's statements, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told Al-Jazeera: "He threatens everybody in the Arab world except Saddam Hussein, he says he wants to fight with Saddam Hussein. "This does confirm that bin Laden and Saddam Hussein seem to find common cause together." And he added: "They are bound by a common hatred, that's what you have bin Laden confirming today." "This didn't just threaten the United States, he threatened half-a dozen Arab governments," Boucher said. "He is threatening the whole world." (Albawaba.com)