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 : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1057)	3/21/2003 9:36:22 PM
From: Crimson Ghost	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

"Disillusion, anger on the Arab Street" Printed on Thursday, March 20, 2003 @ 20:28:52 EST yellowtimes.org By Firas Al-Atraqchi YellowTimes.org Columnist (Canada) (YellowTimes.org) ˆ Feelings of anger and outrage in the Arab world are becoming more vocal as the first day of military action winds down. At approximately 5 AM Baghdad time, U.S. warships and submarines in the Persian Gulf launched 42 Tomahawk cruise missiles at "selected targets" where the CIA determined Iraqi President Saddam Hussein might be residing. They missed. Ninety minutes later, Saddam Hussein, appearing tired and somewhat unorganized in a televised speech debunked rumors that he had been killed. Meanwhile, U.S. officials are divided over whether the man in the televised speech was actually Saddam or a body double. Nevertheless, Arabs have taken to the street to protest a number of things. The first, as one may expect, concerns the actual beginning of hostilities. While most Arabs are not supporters of Saddam and openly resent him, they are very much against a war in which innocent Iraqi civilians will be killed. The second matter of protestation focuses on the fact that the U.S. cruise missile attack came at precisely the same time as the fajr (dawn) call to prayer for Muslims. Arab sentiment, relayed to this writer, believes that such timing was no coincidence and was a message to the Muslim world. The third matter of protestation involves the announcement by White House officials today that Israel had been granted a 10 billion (U.S.) dollar military aid and loan guarantee package. U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice told "Netanyahu that the [Bush] administration decided to raise the amount of the guarantees by $1bn over what had been planned because the Americans were impressed by the economic plan that has been presented to the government," Israel's finance ministry said in a statement. The aid package is part of the U.S. administration's war budget. Arab analysts have been hitting the airwaves claiming that the Israeli aid package is the most bungled public relations fiasco they have ever seen by a U.S. administration. "To announce this package on the same day that Iraq is bombed is as stupid as it is arrogant," said Nabeel Ghanyoum, a military analyst in Syria. "This is effectively telling the Arab world, 'look we are bombing Iraq as we please and we are giving Israel as much financial aid [as] it wants.'" Hours after Israel announced that it was receiving a $10bn aid package from the U.S., and after initial shock and anger from Arab governments, the White House is downplaying the news. According to the BBC, U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told reporters at a briefing: "We don't have any new decisions on that. The request has been made by the Israelis. The status today is the same as yesterday. We are looking at it. We are considering it." In addition, news surfaced recently that the U.S. general who will oversee the alleged reconstruction of Iraq maintains strong ties with Jewish interests in and outside the U.S. Lieutenant General Jay Garner "is said to maintain ties with the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs [JINSA], a nonprofit organization dedicated to strengthening American foreign and defense policy," says The Forward, a Jewish newspaper. "In October 2000, shortly after the outbreak of the intifada, Garner was one of 26 American military leaders to sign a staunchly pro-Israel statement released by JINSA condemning the escalating violence," The Forward goes on to say. Garner is known for his strong pro-Israeli ties and leanings. For example, the pro-Israel statement he signed in October stated: "the security of the State of Israel is a matter of great importance to U.S. policy in the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean, as well as around the world. A strong Israel is an asset that American military planners and political leaders can rely on." When told of Garner's appointment to head the reconstruction effort in Iraq, Ghanyoum was not surprised. "Look, what is the one reason that was not discussed in the American media for this war? Israel, of course. So now the truth comes out after war has taken place. This is about securing Israel by eradicating Iraq and securing the oil wealth to that purpose." At press time, twenty thousand Egyptian demonstrators battled riot police in Cairo, Egypt in one of the more violent clashes the city has seen, as they tried to storm the Israeli and U.S. embassies. The demonstrators called on Egypt to kick out both ambassadors.

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1057)	3/21/2003 9:36:31 PM
From: Doug R	Respond to of 21614

Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9 p.m.: If you want a sense of how lopsided this war is, and how hollow American claims of self-defense must look to the rest of the world, compare two scenes we saw on television tonight. First there were the missile and bomb strikes on Baghdad, reportedly aimed at Saddam Hussein's latest hideout. According to sources for the networks and wire services, the strikes were a last-minute improvisation based on hot intelligence, and U.S. forces are going to pause for a few hours or so to find out whether they hit the jackpot. Retired generals sit in their chairs in the network studios, marveling at the audacity of sending bombers to Baghdad before taking out Iraqi radar and anti-aircraft batteries. They speak in awe of how good our technology has grown since the 1991 Gulf War. We've hit the Iraqis, and they've done squat. Evidently they can't touch us. Then President Bush gets on the tube and tells us why we're doing this. He's wearing a suit, sitting in a building everybody recognizes, and worrying more about how he's holding his head than whether he'll still have it tomorrow. "The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder," says Bush. "We will meet that threat now … so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of firefighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities." I'm glad we won't have to meet that threat in our cities. But watching our guys pummel their guys in their capital with impunity makes me wonder how grave the threat to us really was. The Iraq-al-Qaida connection was always the weakest part of Bush's case against Saddam. The U.N. Security Council is gutless, and I hope one of those bunker busters took Saddam right in the chops. But forgive me if in its first hours this doesn't look like a war of self-defense. slate.msn.com