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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tsigprofit who wrote (13069)	10/17/2004 4:05:03 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

If it wouldn't have been for daddy Bush, oil would have been $150 a barrel already, as he himself said during the second Clinton election. Compare that to Vietnam, proportionally?? Btw, CSPAN just did it, #306 (i wonder if they will archive it or not, this week) booktv.org ending on that misunderestimated, now continuing with #307 booktv.org c-span.org

To: tsigprofit who wrote (13069)	10/17/2004 9:17:18 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 20773

To change my opinion, I'd have to be persuaded that Saddam didn't represent a future threat to the region which we would have had to fight anyway. My opinion is we will still be there in some fashion or other in 2-3 years. Even if we aren't in Iraq proper, American troops are going to be somewhere close by in the Gulf region. The region is vital to the world economy and very vulnerable. I hope and pray the casulties are small, but have no way of knowing what the casulties will be, just like I don't know what the casulties would have been the next time Saddam started a war. Elections in Iraq are coming. I see no reason we will not be able to train a competent Iraqi security force strong enough to crush the resistance. It's encouraging that Sadr's forces are apparently turning in heavy weapons. The violence now is occuring mostly in the Sunni areas and Sunnis represent only 20% of the population.

To: tsigprofit who wrote (13069)	10/18/2004 4:37:47 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

I wonder how many Iraqis need to die, before people decide it was a bad idea (for some people, there probably is no number of Iraqi deaths that would convince them...after all, 2 or 3 years down the road me might have had to kill them anyway...blah blah blah might if could if if if)- no one seems to care very much about those deaths. Deaths of civilians many years ago (many, ironically, during the period when we were supporting Saddam because of his super war with Iran)=bad, deaths of civilians now? Lets not mention them.... Oh my Kind of like killing commies for christ- it's easy to sweep the deaths under the carpet when you've got a good cause. Men never do evil so cheerfully and completely as when they do it for a belief... Save us from men and their "noble" beliefs that involve killing other people.