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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (30348)	3/28/2003 7:18:05 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

They didn't like U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia Hello!!??? Why were US troops in Saudi Arabia throughout the '90s?? Because Saddam was still in power, and still threatening to re-invade Kuwait and Saudi Arabia (1994) Had Saddam been removed from power in 1991, US troop presence would not have been required nearly to the extent that it was. There would have been no "Operation Deny Flight, Operation Southern Watch.. No UN inspectors (after 1991), and the Iraqi people would be FAR BETTER OFF economically. But most importantly, there would have been far less chance of a 9/11 event since Bin Laden would not have been able to cite the large US presence necessary to protect the Saudis. But no... because we left him in power, we're now reaping the repercussions and the consequences. and particularly U.S. support of Israel's expansion. Absurd.. Without Saddam to "inspire" and fund them, Arafat's Fatah movement would have been suffered a severe loss of face given their support of Saddam. They would have lost their patron and been forced to accept the Oslo accords. Which would likely have resulted in a Palestinian state being in existence RIGHT NOW... Hawk