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 : Strictly: Drilling II -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ms.smartest.person who wrote (28458)	2/20/2003 8:46:27 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Respond to of 36161

<<From what our government has leaked on TV (before Turkey's demand for more money), the plan was to invade Iraq from 3 sides>> Remember Gulf War I, when our government "leaked" that we were holding amphibious training exercises in the Persian Gulf....nice headfake there, our plan is probably not what we are hearing through the media. <<When you say casualties from the Gulf War, are you taking into account the mega-casualties who were gassed? Last I heard it was in the hundred of thousands, with > 30K being seriously affected and disabled. The government is finally recognizing these casualties -- they just don't include them in the official casualty count from PGI. Government statistics may not include them, but I sure do.>> An excellent point...keep in mind that the Gulf War syndrome casualties are thought to have resulted from LOW-LEVEL exposure. In an all out chemical attack, even against troops fully trained in chemical warfare, casualties would be MUCH higher, including delayed morbidity post war from lower level exposure (of Sarin/VX type agents). 30K seems a tad high for Gulf War syndrome, but the numbers certainly do reach the thousands, perhaps 10,000 plus. Still, it's better to go at 'em and neutralize those weapons over there than face them over here against an unprepared and unaware American population. I'm not necessarily against a draft, despite my perjorative comments about DemoRats!<G> Seems reasonable to me that the burdens of war should be distributed more or less equally across a society, but that's probably just my left brain talking....<G> Regards Patron