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 : Attack Iraq? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (3757)	2/17/2003 11:20:47 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 8683

As I recall, it was our idea to put Saddam in the top spot in the first place. He was supposed to be a well behaved puppet to help us stomp on Iran, which occupied about the same relationship to the US in the 80s as Iraq did in the 90s. We supplied arms to Iraq and our observers watched the chemical weapons tests on the Kurds. When Iraq didn't cooperate in letting US ventures exploit their oil field, we decided to make an example out of them. After Kuwait drilled a bunch of slanted wells into Iraqi reserves, Iraq went to the US to get permission to prevent Kuwait from stealing their oil. Permission was granted and we turned around and stomped them flat. 1 Iraqi scumbag and 1 American scumbag equals 2 scumbags. George and Saddam are both scumbags. Non support for George DOES NOT equal support for Saddam. As far as I'm concerned, since they obviously don't like each other, stick them both in a sack, and when one half of the sack stops moving, open it up to see who needs to elect a new President. Repeat the process as needed until the matter is resolved.