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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: philv who wrote (17963)	4/12/2003 5:28:45 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 81286

Phil > even the aliens clearly support the U.S.A. What do you mean support --- they're in charge! Anyway, nice crack.<lol> > you obviously must change your opinions Not only because of the aliens, I think the US may get away with it. > Sad to watch the aftermath of this war in the "cradle of civilization". The looting and lawlessness, looting of hospitals, and now the complete sacking of the national museum containing priceless items. Don't worry, all those "priceless items" will soon be found in New York gift shops --- with prices! >These institutions received no protection, unlike the oil fields. Actually, I don't entirely blame the invading forces for the lack of policing because events overtook them. In fact, I was amazed at the speed the Iraqi forces simply collapsed, after having fought so valiantly for many days. Indeed, I even had the idea that some kind of "deal" was done although the US will never admit it. > Again they are reporting a possible find of a chemical weapon, while the Iraqi chief scientist/spokesman still insists there aren't any WMDs. Actually, I'm very pleased General Al Saadi gave himself up to the Americans. I'm sure he's not guilty of anything and I believe him when he said, today, that he always told the truth. Previously, in his press interviews I always thought he was a very decent and capable fellow and I wouldn't be surprised to see him holding an important place in the new regime. > I watched Rumsfeld the other day uncomfortably and quickly dismissing questions regarding Iraqi WMDs, while other speakers are de-emphasizing the importance of WMDs, pointing out the brutality of the regime instead, and insisting that was reason enough for the "war". Funny how these things change. WMDs were never the real reason for the war, merely the pretext. The war was coming even if the Pope swore on the Bible that there were no WMDs. guardian.co.uk > There is also now some discussion about American influence and control of the entire region. This obviously was the intent and reason for the "war" in the first place. Without any doubt. informationclearinghouse.info >>>Iraq is a campaign in a much larger war and not a war in itself. We now will see what that means. The war in Iraq is not over: There are extraordinarily complex politico-military missions to confront. This is particularly true in the north, where some substantial Iraqi forces appear to remain and where the political situation among various players -- Kurdish, Turkish, Iranian and Syrian -- remains complex, dynamic and opaque. Nevertheless, it is possible to make some assessment of the intended and unintended consequences of the war.<<< From what I have read, Dr George Friedman, who wrote that piece, is a brilliant person who was once very high in the US military establishment. Although I don't agree with him about the reasons for the war I, nevertheless, do not think one can discount anything he says. >Iran, Syria, even Saudi Arabia and Egypt must be wondering what the next move in US "diplomacy" will be. You can be sure. You can also add Turkey to that list. Now that Iraq has become a US asset, Turkey is no longer all that important and it may just suit the US to give the Kurds their own "place in the sun", much to the chagrin of the Turks. >I sincerely wish the US success, and won't mind admitting I was wrong if proven to be so. Grudgingly, I agree with you particularly if the transfer of power to a new government is bloodless, which I very much doubt it will be. But I have been proved wrong so many times that in a few months time we may observe a most successful transition. There have been so many unexpected turns in what we have seen in the last few weeks/months that I certainly wouldn't like to take bets on any eventuality. >It's a huge and bold gamble, reshaping world alliances. Sure, it certainly was a gamble and still is and it will definitely reshape world alliances. However, one has to remember that Saddam, with or without his WMDs, was a US/CIA "creation" in the first place. What has happened is that the idea of having a "paper tiger" to represent US interests in the region, but who became a liability, has given way to the idea of enforced "democracy". So we will now see how this works out. One way or another, first Britain and then the US, have dominated the politics of the region for many years and it is quite clear that they are going to continue "pulling the strings" there for as long as they can.