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: tejek who wrote (162079)	2/25/2003 3:49:28 PM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1579762

ted, Another one bites the dust! cnn.com NEW YORK (AP) -- MSNBC fired Phil Donahue on Tuesday, abruptly ending the veteran talk show host's return to television after six months of poor ratings. Steve

To: tejek who wrote (162079)	2/25/2003 4:32:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579762

Of course, you don't think we or the Germans were selling military stuff to Iraq in the 90s, do you? That would be the ultimate insult to the American public. <g> There is also the 70s and earlier. But whenever the weapons were bought the majority of them came from the USSR. Look.....I consider the US and Germany to be quality countries and not 'hos trying to make a fast buck. To ignore that our foreign policy is fukked at times does none of us any good. That's why I don't think the amounts are material, its the intent behind the amounts that is most important. I consider the amount to be important because my biggest concern about weapons sales is the practical result. In hindsight.....why hindsight? Why wasn't it argued then? We knew then that Saddam was a ruthless bastard. But back in the 80s he was considered just another ruthless bastard rather then one that was particuarly agressive or nasty. So......if we are going to trade with the devil, lets at least make more money than France, right? My point was simply that the practical effect of not selling the helicopters would have been insignificant. I don't understand. You have scumbag number one and scumbag number two. Neither is good. Then how is it better that Iran didn't overrun Iraq? Because it would have made Iran until a big threat to the whole region. Bigger then either of the countries could have been while the other was there to balance them off. It would have been very destabilizing. " I just think that some people, perhaps including you make too big of deal of these weapon sales. If you can prove we sold them antrax, nerve gas and enriched uranium then I would have a different opinion." I have posted links before; here's still another: cursor.org The items listed in that link do not include anthrax, nerve gas or enriched uranium however they do include things that have helped Saddam's WMD program and at least some of them should have been considered a mistake even without the benefit of hindsight. In the late 70s, the 80s and the 90s there was a strong move away from strict controls over dual use items. A lot of companies where complaining that they where losing important business, that the countries that wanted the items could get most of them anyway and that there where legitimate peaceful uses for them and that these sales where for the peaceful uses. They argued that export restrictions hurt American companies and often served no useful purpose. The sales of these dual use items are some of the fruits of these arguments. Al and I may have differing opinions but at least he and I agree that there are rules I had thought all of us still played under that had to do with morality and honesty. Except Bill Clinton <g> Different people have different opinions about what constitutes morality or how it applies in different situations. But I do think there is some common ground we can agree on. The exact boundries of it might shift from time to time but there should be some core that is relatively stable. If its immoral for someone to sell anthrax to Saddam, then its just as immoral for the US gov't no matter what foreign policy scheme it has up its sleeve......IMO. I agree, even though we didn't sell anthrax to Iraq. Tim