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: Doug R who wrote (4291)	3/28/2003 3:41:25 AM
From: Andy Thomas	Respond to of 21614

who gives a hoot about a bunch of kuwaiti shieks anyway? and if saddam had taken over saudi arabia only the mossad would have shed a tear... saddam would have still sold us the oil...

To: Doug R who wrote (4291)	3/28/2003 6:46:12 AM
From: ChrisJP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Hi Doug -- You also have to recall that the US' stated position on Kuwait prior to Iraq's invasion was to tell Iraq we had no interest in the quarrel .... So that means: 1. We had no interest in occupying Middle Eastern countries as a convenient way to protect our future oil supply. 2. Our first inclination was to help resolve the problem diplomatically and peacefully. 3. Saddam's response was to roll tanks into Kuwait and start executing its citizens. Hmmmmmmmmmmm ........... there's a lesson in there somewhere. :-) Anyway -- I'm sure can tell there's some people here who are not quite rational (I won't name names by I'll give you a hint: matthew, Just_Observing) lol. There's a couple here on the "patriotic" side that could use some social skills too, lol. But I consider their behavior a result of them not being able to accept that they can't reason with people who fundametally can't be reasoned with. Chris

To: Doug R who wrote (4291)	3/28/2003 7:03:49 AM
From: ChrisJP	Respond to of 21614

Hi Doug -- also .... I don't think I ever said that the US's foreign policy was based on altruism. It's based on protecting the strategic interests of its citizens and our sovereignty. Sometimes the implementation of that policy takes on unpleasant forms. The implementations don't always achieve their desired result. By the way -- as soon as the Berlin Wall fell, the government started slashing the Defense Departments budget. After about 5 or 6 years, it's was 25% less (in terms of buying power) than it was in 1989. We would prefer it if the rest of the world could deal with their own problems. But they can't. 12 years of diplomacy trying to get Saddam to abide by concessions he agreed to. Sooner or later, one of our administrations would have said "enough is enough". It just happened to be this one. By the way -- this ain't a George Bush issue -- it should be clear to you that we have a fairly decent "human-intelligence" (i.e. spy) network in Iraq. Guess which administration made sure we had one in place ? Hint: It takes waaaay more than 2 years to build a spy network. The funny thing is the right-wingers have trouble accepting how much military action Clinton intiated ! They don't want to give him any credit. lol Chris