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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (134313)	5/24/2004 11:55:46 PM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Jacob, the speech was just empty slogans. It may impress some people for a day or two. Unfortunately the killings in Iraq will continue. Actually, they'll continue with or without US occupation. Though wedding massacres will likely not occur after the US leaves. But plenty of other killings will go on for years until a new dictator consolidates power. Quite likely, even after the US troops leaves, if a strong central government emerges, the US will continue funding terrorists in Iraq to make difficulties for the central government. The US agenda, which is Israel's agenda is that Iraq becomes either 1- friendly to Israel, or 2- too fragmented and pre-occupied to help Palestinians in any way. The removal of Saddam Hussein is just the first step. The long-term neutralizing of Iraq as an Arab country will go on with covert funds to whoever is willing to be a terrorist for dollars and weaken an independent Iraqi government. As the US did in Afghanistan, to weaken the pro-Soviet government that preceded the Taliban. That fire will continue burning for a long time. Sarmad

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (134313)	5/25/2004 1:12:44 AM
From: toddy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

hi Jacob: maybe you could help me in finding an answer on why is tony blair getting out of this ? for years the question been dogging me. it is too late now for blair to back out. and i assume his support garner UK a few contracts to rebuild Iraq. or maybe some financial benefits to cherie blair ( just pure speculation ) during the initial preparation for invasion, tony blair provided the intellectual heft, credibility, prestige and experience to the argument of imminent danger from WMD. he was and still now taking great risk to his political career in doin so. with the UK political system, blair can lose the confidence of his Labor party and be booted out of his prime ministership any time ala margaret thatcher. i like the way the parliament debate issues in the bowel of the house. ;o) the question still is, what is tony blair getting out of his support ? thank you toddy ;o) ps; if you have TV running Bush speech, not looking at it but listening, your impression would be someone running for president of Iraq, no ?