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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (14629)	3/14/2003 10:23:09 PM
From: Clappy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Now that's an opinion I can agree with! I figured if I pushed your buttons enough I'd get you to tell me your thoughts instead of someone else's. <g> <ng> I do agree on much of what you say and post about Shrub. There are a few things that I think is necessary about what we are seeing come out of Washington, though. Without a strong military threat and presence we may not be able to get Saddam's army to surrender quickly. Saddam is only cooperating like this because of the threat. He feels nervous. As he should. If the US does not impose this threat things go back to the way it was with him. If Shrub manages to get Saddam's generals to surrender, the war could be won with barely a shot fired. -Clapper

To: stockman_scott who wrote (14629)	3/15/2003 1:18:14 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 89467

Hi stockman_scott; Re: "I WOULD NOT VOTE FOR BUSH AGAIN" I had no idea that you voted for Bush. I voted for the moron too. I knew he wasn't a genius, but now I'm wishing I'd gone with the tree hugger. -- Carl

To: stockman_scott who wrote (14629)	3/15/2003 8:14:20 AM
From: Clappy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Allied plan gives Iraqis chance to topple Saddam By Patrick Bishop in Kuwait (Filed: 15/03/2003) The war in Iraq is expected to be a two-stage operation with a pause to allow time for Saddam Hussein to be toppled by his own people. Allied planners expect only limited resistance in the south of the country when the main thrust is finally launched by British and American forces currently completing their deployment in Kuwait. Troops are under orders to do everything to minimise military casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure in order to consolidate goodwill and apply further pressure on the Baghdad regime to turn on Saddam and remove the need for an attack on the capital. A senior British Army officer said: "No one's going to go charging into Baghdad. Fighting in urban areas is a hugely risky business." If the regime does not fall under the shock of the initial assault, a stand-off around Baghdad is "a very likely scenario". There are high hopes that demoralised and ill-equipped Iraqi troops barring the road to Baghdad will surrender at the first opportunity and that civilians will welcome the invaders as liberators. "Certainly in the south the Iraqi army are not that well equipped and their resolve to fight does not appear great," said the officer. "But we are still prepared for some resistance." Planners have drawn up "hard" and "soft" options to take account of the level of fight the Iraqis show. "If you can bring about the defeat of the Iraqi army with a minimum amount of destruction to civilian infrastructure, mosques and even the Iraqi army itself then the second phase of post conflict infrastructure is so much easier." The intention is to hand over to the Iraqis "a basically functioning country without creating a legacy of hate". The advancing forces will look for every opportunity to bypass Iraqi formations and arrange local ceasefires and to demonstrate their goodwill towards civilians. "It's about not picking a fight unduly but reserving the full right to use maximum force if problems arise," he said. "That's firmly understood in the British division. It's a more subtle approach. It all comes down to the end state, which is achieving regime change. Bringing the Iraqi people on board is a very good way to do that." The British forces will be engaged in and around the major southern city of Basra. Their responsibilities are expected to include securing the Gulf port of Umm Qasr, a major oil terminal. Capturing the huge and easily exploited southern Iraq oil fields is seen as another key element in the Allied plan to force Saddam out. "The military planning takes full account of the economic significance of the oilfields for Iraq's future," said the source. "If you can get [them] intact that's a huge pyschological message to flash to Baghdad. Sixty per cent of the oil comes from the south." The Allied planning appears heavily weighted towards an incremental strategy that applies mounting pressure and allows time for Saddam's henchmen to decide their self- interest lies in risking a move against him. "This is all about getting someone to tip him over," said the source. Resistance is expected to grow as forces approach the capital and encounter Republican Guard and Special Republican Guard units. Once at the gates of the capital there is no intention to fall in with Saddam's declared plan for a bloody showdown in the streets of Baghdad. Allied troops are likely to hold back and wait for the collapse of the regime. news.telegraph.co.uk

To: stockman_scott who wrote (14629)	3/15/2003 12:39:47 PM
From: portage	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Excellent post Scott. What amazes me is that many intelligent people actually fell for shrub's aw shucks b.s. in the campaign. Not that they would have preferred Gore, but that they actually believed what this guy said. In spite of all the skills that I do not have, I do have a well developed bullshit detector. And Bush put me on red alert from the beginning. The signs were all there. Talking a smooth game of "compassionate conservative" (which I interpreted as meaning compassionate to conservatives), here's a guy who : Drops his props on Bob Jones U. Talks humble but walks with a swagger Befriended Enron big time while they're raping California, then disavows them the second they can harm him. But I still don't see any of the Enronites in jail yet. Comes from big oil. Duh. Energy policy means drilling more wherever you can find it (except off his brother's state's coastline) Refused to talk about his checkered past, or the "missing" months of obligatory National Guard duty that he was said to have skipped Tried to bury his drunken driving charges, then developed a lame excuse just before election day that he was protecting his daughters Saw a big gov't surplus (year 2000). Good for a tax cut. Now the economy's in trouble. Needs a tax cut stimulus. Deficits don't matter. Whatever. Wants to more or less completely deregulate everything (i.e. let mega-corporations run both business and government, with no checks or balances for the little guy) Praised Clarence Thomas and Anthony Scalia (the hardest right of the bunch) as his models Made a public spectacle of his religion (who even gives a shit ? Oh yeah, a certain group of voters that he needs) Pretended that he wanted to bring a "balance" to the environment (um, he's now let brother Jeb block oil drilling off the Fla. coast, while wanting to open the Calif. coast for drilling and doubling the timber cutting here too, by jettisoning a multi-year negotiated agreement between the timber interests and environmentalists with a stroke of the pen) I could go on and on, but you know the story. That's before even mentioning Iraq and shrub's "We (the US) are the world" attitude. Black and white. Good and evil. You're with us or against us. Why should I bother listening to you ? A dangerous, phony, unelected, world class hypocrite who thinks he's king. Fortunately, the 2004 election is drawing ever closer, ha ha.