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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (43446)	12/16/2003 7:37:57 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Blair says he has evidence of clandestine labs in Iraq. This ought to be good. <g>

To: elmatador who wrote (43446)	12/17/2003 4:24:17 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

The criticism of Saddam for hiding in a hole in the ground is quite funny given the hiding in holes that the US government did in the aftermath of the 911 attacks. The President fled around the country in an aircraft, frightened of some guys with box-cutters. Saddam had hordes of amazingly armed soldiers, with Stealth fighters and night goggles, knockout gases and stun grenades. It's not really surprising that he hid in a hole in the ground and hoped they'd not find him. Saddam had better reason to hide underground than the USA government did. He also had good reason not to fire back as that would instantly have led to his demise. His actions have been much more sensible. For example, he can confirm in person that he did not have weapons of mass destruction. He can say in person just what he thought the USA intended when they gave him the go ahead to invade Kuwait. He can discuss the support the USA gave him to conduct the war against Iran. As totalitarian dictators go, he was never in the big league, other than that he had a record number of palaces. Since they would far outlast him, [if not destroyed by enemy action], that's the equivalent of building the White House, Congress etc = they were intended to act as the government HQ. Buckingham Palace, the Emperor's Palace in Tokyo, Windsor Castle, the Maharajah's palace in Mysore are all the same thing. Saddam didn't do anything different from any other ruler around the world. The main thing he did was get on the wrong side of the oil crowd, not to mention supporting attacks on Israelis. He killed a lot fewer people than the USA did in Vietnam. It's funny seeing the slavering self-righteousness of the rabid mob in the modern Colosseum of gladiators, As Seen on TV. Which should not be misinterpreted as meaning I think Saddam's a good bloke. I'd be happy if the USA carried on and dealt with a few other totalitarian thugs too. While the USA is far from perfect, I'm happy to have an order of magnitude improvement. My taxes paid for Saddam's demise and that's fine by me. Especially, it was good to see Uday go. Right now, I'll take the USA over the UN, though it would be good to see a constitutional conference to make the UN what it should be, which is a supranational body designed to handle common ground [and spectrum and ocean and air and rivers and borders and stuff]. The current WWII victors' club is a silly arrangement. Plus ca change, Mqurice