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: PartyTime who wrote (7330)	4/3/2003 10:49:35 PM
From: Jagfan	Respond to of 21614

Attempt at balance?? How long have been employed by Saddam?

To: PartyTime who wrote (7330)	4/3/2003 11:01:16 PM
From: Techplayer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

PT, Saddam was unable to because he incapacitated or killed on day 1. He likely took a bunker buster off of the cranium. The wells and bridges were loaded with explosives. He wasn't around to give the order to blow them. He misjudged the start of the war. He was waiting for the air campaign. Instead, the troops raced in and secured the oil fields nin the first 2 days while his minions figured out what to do without him. There were reports of multiple wells wired with explosives.

To: PartyTime who wrote (7330)	4/4/2003 7:00:50 AM
From: ChrisJP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Hi PartyTime, I consider it an odd part of our culture that we seem to need to have a boogeyman with a face. Although clearly the worst boogeymen are those with no face. And yes, politicians manipulate our need to have a common external enemy that threatens our way of life. And TV media eats it up cuz it means good rating and therefore advertising dollars. And at the same time, we have an overpowering need to be perceived by the rest of the world as "the good guys". Which is tough to have happen when you're kicking ass every 5 years or so. My theory on the US's use of cluster bombs and some other possibly not-so-humane weapons: We are always trying to build better weapons. But they need to be tested under real conditions to see how viable they really are. I'd say at maybe 20% of what you're seeing on the battlefield is really the Dept. of Defense testing what they built. Chris