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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GST who wrote (158011)	6/20/2003 4:03:38 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

LOL. I was wondering how long it'd take you to post that story. Allow me to highlight a few lines for you. LONDON (Reuters) - The United States reserves the right to take military action to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons, a leading member of President Bush (news - web sites)'s administration said on Friday. "It has to be an option," John Bolton, under secretary of state for arms control and international security, told BBC radio when pressed on the issue. But he stressed that it was one among an array of possibilities and relatively low down the agenda. "The president has repeatedly said that all options are on the table, but that is not only not our preference it is far, far from our minds," Bolton said. The United States has steadily ratcheted up the pressure on Iran, which with Russian help is building a nuclear power station, to abide by the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and sign a new protocol that would allow snap inspections. Washington, which suspects that Tehran is trying to develop a secret nuclear arms program, insists the plant could be used to produce weapons-grade material. Nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency on Thursday criticized Iran's failure to comply with agreements designed to prevent the use of civilian nuclear resources to make atomic weapons. But its statement fell short of the damning resolution Washington had hoped for. Again, tell me who in the administration has said we should take ANY military action against, much less invade, Iran.

To: GST who wrote (158011)	6/20/2003 10:26:19 PM
From: Bill Harmond	Respond to of 164684

.........x.....x .....o..xoooo..........12..2.2.2. xxuuxuuuuu,,,.....sl;ls[;ls,l..

To: GST who wrote (158011)	6/20/2003 10:26:58 PM
From: Bill Harmond	Respond to of 164684

;;;sooo,dmcdnln ....c.. kkkofospaj ;LLldoll...'/,c/?sc.;s...hell;.-oo?

To: GST who wrote (158011)	6/20/2003 10:27:41 PM
From: Bill Harmond	Respond to of 164684

nlal;;;;KC;KK ....,'HEE;;LLLO-O? hELLLL-O?

To: GST who wrote (158011)	6/20/2003 10:29:09 PM
From: Bill Harmond	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

hELLll-o....?? I'mmmm tryyying to gwet my link up..has northh kora nnnuked us yet? I;mmm in mmy shelllter.....

To: GST who wrote (158011)	6/20/2003 11:52:01 PM
From: Victor Lazlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

" I didn’t see any of this during my stay in western and northern Iraq last month. I went to quite a lot of effort to look for complete security breakdowns, miserable lives and total lack of basic services, but I couldn’t find them in Tikrit or Rutba, Kirkuk or Ramadi, Samarra or even Fallujah, where they’ve had one or two little local difficulties but nothing like the widespread civic collapse Mr Day confidently asserts. In Iraq, the Americans and British are muddling through; in the Congo, ‘international law’, as represented by the French and the UN, is failing big time. That’s my view and it happens to fit my prejudices. But it also fits the facts." spectator.co.uk