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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (17631)	11/25/2003 1:59:26 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793717

We obviously have to be ready to seize the Eastern Saudi oil fields and help the Shias there set up a separate Government. Let Jordan worry about the western part. They could take and hold Mecca. And they would be the legitimate ones to do so. Might be necessary at some point, but certainly wouldn't be fun. I'm not sure how a Jordanian occupation of Saudi Arabia could be classified as "legitimate". The only meaningful yardstick for legitimacy is the consent of those who would be governed, which might not be forthcoming. They couldn't take it without so much help from us that they would be seen (not without justification) as a proxy, which in return would mean open war with the Islamic world. Not a prospect anyone would relish. We could move into Pakistan and take the Nukes if the place falls apart. Fortunately, we now have the "Lily Pads" to do both if forced to. Our forces on both of those "Lily Pads" are stretched to the limit and barely able to control the pads they are on. By the time we piled enough force in to take another bite, the nukes would be long gone and under the deepest possible cover. We could take them, of course. We could take them right in the face, though a few would probably end up in India and Israel. Nice solutions in the abstract. I don't think they'd work so nicely in practice.