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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (27535)	9/13/2003 11:07:45 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Jw: nice article... I saw a Richebacher editorial in the Financial Times recently...it was a good one too. -s2

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (27535)	9/13/2003 1:48:31 PM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 89467

Very Nice Article JW. Posted the link on my board on the FOOL. M

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (27535)	9/13/2003 11:48:02 PM
From: abuelita	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

jim- i really, really enjoyed reading your letter: i thank you for relaying herr richebächer views, his reaction to yours, and the interaction you experienced with him; i enjoyed your humour (as always) and i really appreciate your honesty. just one thing. aside from being debt free and accumulating gold, how does one protect oneself from richebächer's prediction of impending global economic disaster? do we all go down the tube? rose edit: another thought. ben laden & co. don't need to strike again. they can just sit back and watch the west self-destruct.

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (27535)	9/14/2003 12:30:29 PM
From: abuelita	Respond to of 89467

jim- its 50/50 whether the swedes go with the euro in today's vote: Stockholm — After months of debate over whether to adopt the European Union's common currency, Swedes voted Sunday in a somber referendum overshadowed by the murder of Foreign Minister Anna Lindh. theglobeandmail.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (27535)	9/14/2003 3:40:50 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

America's Hidden Battlefield Toll ____________________________________ by Jason Burke in London and Paul Harris in New York Published on Sunday, September 14, 2003 by the Observer/UK The true scale of American casualties in Iraq is revealed today by new figures obtained by The Observer, which show that more than 6,000 American servicemen have been evacuated for medical reasons since the beginning of the war, including more than 1,500 American soldiers who have been wounded, many seriously. It is believed many of the American casualties evacuated from Iraq are seriously injured. The figures will shock many Americans, who believe that casualties in the war in Iraq have been relatively light. Recent polls show that support for President George Bush and his administration's policy in Iraq has been slipping. The number of casualties will also increase pressure on Bush to share the burden of occupying Iraq with more nations. Attempts to broker an international alliance to pour more men and money into Iraq foundered yesterday when Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, brusquely rejected a French proposal as 'totally unrealistic'. Three US soldiers were killed last week, bringing the number of combat dead since hostilities in Iraq were declared officially over on 1 May to 68. A similar number have died in accidents. It is military police policy to announce that a soldier has been wounded only if they were involved in an incident that involved a death. Critics of the policy say it hides the true extent of the casualties. The new figures reveal that 1,178 American soldiers have been wounded in combat operations since the war began on 20 March. It is believed many of the American casualties evacuated from Iraq are seriously injured. Modern body armour, worn by almost all American troops, means wounds that would normally kill a man are avoided. However vulnerable arms and legs are affected badly. This has boosted the proportion of maimed among the injured. There are also concerns that many men serving in Iraq will suffer psychological trauma. Experts at the National Army Museum in London said studies of soldiers in the First and Second World Wars showed that it was prolonged exposure to combat environments that was most damaging. Some American units, such as the Fourth Infantry Division, have been involved in frontline operations for more than six months. Andrew Robertshaw, an expert at the museum, said wars also claimed casualties after they were over. 'Soldiers were dying from injuries sustained during World War I well into the 1920s,' he said. British soldiers are rotated more frequently than their American counterparts. The Ministry of Defense has recently consulted the National Army Museum about psychological disorders suffered by combatants in previous wars in a bid to avoid problems. The wounded return to the USA with little publicity. Giant C-17 transport jets on medical evacuation missions land at Andrews Air Force Base, near Washington, every night. Battlefield casualties are first treated at Army field hospitals in Iraq then sent to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, where they are stabilized. Andrews is the first stop back home. As the planes taxi to a halt, gangplanks are lowered and the wounded are carried or walk out. A fleet of ambulances and buses meet the C-17s most nights to take off the most seriously wounded. Those requiring urgent operations and amputations are ferried to America's two best military hospitals, the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, near Washington, and the National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda. The hospitals are busy. Sometimes all 40 of Walter Reed's intensive care beds are full. Dealing with the aftermath of amputations and blast injuries is common. Mines, home-made bombs and rocket-propelled grenades are the weapons of choice of the Iraqi resistance fighters. They cause the sort of wounds that will cost a soldier a limb. The less badly wounded stay overnight at the air base, where an indoor tennis club and a community Center have been turned into a medical staging facility. Many have little but the ragged uniforms on their backs. A local volunteer group, called America's Heroes of Freedom, has set up on the base to provide them with fresh clothes, food packages and toiletries. 'This is our way of saying, "We have not forgotten you,"' said group founder Susan Brewer. © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003 commondreams.org

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (27535)	9/14/2003 5:43:52 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

MARKET REVIEW: What does the gold market know? dailyreckoning.com For five straight days last week, the NYSE traders matched up millions of buyers and sellers, and processed hundreds of billions of dollars worth of trades. And at the end of it all, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed out the week... drum roll, please... nearly unchanged. The Dow and S&P both fell a mere 0.3% over the past five trading days, while the Nasdaq fell 0.2%. The Dow's modest lost snapped a 5-week winning streak. But bullish sentiment is still alive and well. Stocks are in vogue and investors can't seem to buy enough of these things, no matter how richly priced they might be. Curiously, most folks trust a rallying stock like children trust a policeman. Unfortunately, a rallying stock is more likely to commit petty larceny than to "protect and serve." But as long as the stock market is rising, the lumpeninvestoriat will trust that all is well and hope that all will soon be better still. They will believe that economic conditions are improving and that stocks will continue rising. We hope the lumps are right... Indeed, we suspect that they're half-right; the economy seems to be showing signs of recovery. But the lumps are also half-wrong: an improving economy doesn't mean than an overvalued stock market will become even more overpriced. Maybe this realization is seeping into the subconscious of some investors. Perhaps this latent anxiety about the stock market, coupled with clear and present worries about the U.S. dollar, is inspiring a few folks to buy gold. The yellow metal charged out of the starting blocks early in the week with a dazzling $6.60 gain on Tuesday to $382.80 an ounce - the highest closing price in seven years. But the precious metal tarnished a bit as the week wore on, slipping to $374.80 at week's end. Despite the fact that gold ended the week a few dollars farther away from $400 an ounce than where it started, the price jump into the rarefied air above $380 sent the gold bugs hearts a-flutter. Gold bulls have little to complain about. The yellow metal has jumped more than $30 over the last three months and gold stocks have been on fire. The XAU Index of gold shares has greatly outdistanced the S&P 500 year-to-date with a sparkling gain of 20%. "What does the gold market know?" we wondered aloud earlier this week. "Does it know that the Fed's reflation campaign will succeed too well? Or does it know that President Bush will continue spending billions of taxpayer dollars to preserve Iraq as a breeding ground for terrorists and a habitat for anti-American terrorist acts? "Or maybe the gold market knows only that U.S. financial assets are very expensive, and worries, therefore, that U.S. stocks selling for 35 times earnings, U.S. bonds yielding 4.40%, and a U.S. dollar selling for $1.12 per euro are all too pricey for risk-averse investors to own in large quantities. "Gold has always provided a kind of insurance, first and foremost. It is not an 'investment' per se. But when economic uncertainties mount, buying a bit of gold 'insurance' can be a terrific investment." Stay tuned... Regards, Eric J. Fry The Daily Reckoning

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (27535)	9/15/2003 9:33:55 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

We Must Be Willing To Pay the Costs ______________________________________ By Jeffrey H. Smith Editorial The Washington Post Monday, September 15, 2003 washingtonpost.com Late last month we buried another classmate. He now lies at West Point with many classmates who were killed in Vietnam. The class of 1966 is now beginning to die of natural causes, but early in our lives far too many of us met violent deaths in Vietnam. Thirty-three members of our graduating class of 579 were killed in Vietnam -- the highest number of any West Point class. Now one of our members, retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark, who recently has been sharply critical of the administration's strategy in its latest conflict, is being urged to run for president. The West Point cemetery has been a military cemetery since the Revolutionary War. It is a beautiful place, with a commanding view of the Hudson River, old stone walls and an impressive number of giant oak, hickory, chestnut and maple trees. Some of America's greatest heroes lie there. Most made the ultimate sacrifice in pursuit of wise and just causes. But far too many died in military follies or ruinous misadventures. Gen. George Custer, for example, is buried there. Regardless, they stepped forward and did their duty when called, as have countless other young American men and women. There are now fresh graves at West Point and our other national cemeteries. A new generation of U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines is meeting violent deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those of us too old to fight now debate whether our national security strategy is sound. It is the duty of our generation, whether in or out of uniform, to make certain that the nation understands the consequences and costs of its policies. In our democracy the people must understand the nation's policies and be committed to them. We must be willing to pay the costs necessary in blood and treasure to see those policies through. If the policies are based on false premises, whether from wishful thinking or bad intelligence, they will ultimately fail. Many believe the president misled the nation by overstating Saddam Hussein's link to terrorism or the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Great concern also exists about whether the administration truly understood the situation we would face in Iraq or was overly optimistic in its predictions that we would be welcomed as liberators and could rapidly build a democratic Iraq. No one should question our country's achievements in forcing the Taliban out of Kabul or getting rid of Saddam Hussein's regime. At the same time no one should question how difficult -- or how important -- it is to achieve our mission in both countries. To the extent that the administration's case for going to war does not withstand scrutiny, it undermines the president's efforts to build support for the sacrifices necessary at home and to obtain a commitment from our allies to provide troops and financial assistance in Iraq. Leveling with the American people and our allies about the costs that lie ahead in Afghanistan and Iraq is crucial in re-establishing confidence in our policies. The president's Sept. 7 speech was a step in the right direction, but much work and many risks lie ahead. Congress should promptly approve the president's supplemental request. But we must also look at the longer term. The budget the president is preparing to submit to Congress for the coming fiscal year must adequately fund the U.S. armed forces not only in Iraq and Afghanistan but also in Korea and other places around the world where a strong U.S. presence is needed. There must be ample funding for other aspects of nation-building essential to preventing Iraq and Afghanistan from sliding into chaos and violence. We should also think hard about whether it is necessary to increase the size of the armed services. Independent budget analysts at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments predict that the president's long-term defense plans could increase the federal deficit by up to $1.08 trillion between fiscal 2004 and 2013. And that's before his recent request for supplemental appropriations for Iraq. The growing deficit may at some point pose a risk to national security if it grows out of control and the economy continues to lag. Consideration should also be given to some form of universal national service -- including reinstating the draft -- to ensure that we have adequate personnel to meet our national security needs. Service in the Peace Corps or similar programs could be an alternative to military service. It is folly to take this nation into dangerous foreign missions -- however critical -- without making the corresponding commitment to pay the price. All of this will be costly. It may be necessary to increase taxes to pay for these measures. But the failure to respond to these needs is even more costly in dollars, lives and failed policies. This was brought into sharp focus by recent remarks of retired Marine Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, former commander in chief for the region that includes Iraq and Afghanistan. Zinni spoke for our generation of soldiers when, according to The Post, he said that "our feelings and sensitivities were forged on the battlefields of Vietnam, where we heard the garbage and the lies, and we saw the sacrifice . . . I ask you, is it happening again?" We are in danger, he said, "of failing." We cannot allow that to happen. At our classmate's funeral, after taps had sounded and the volley of rifle shots had faded, a small group of us stood under a magnificent old locust tree. It was a gentle August morning; West Point rarely looked more beautiful or more confident. Yet, as we stood there, the conversation turned to Iraq and Wes Clark's potential candidacy. One of our classmates said, "We are standing here, on the graves of our classmates killed in Vietnam, talking seriously of another classmate being president of the United States." A hushed moment followed, and then with choked voices several classmates said almost in unison, "Tell Wes to go." Whether he runs or not, the views that he, Gen. Zinni and others have recently been expressing must be heeded. All of the men and women who now rest in national cemeteries demand it. _______________________________ The writer is a former general counsel of the CIA. © 2003 The Washington Post Company