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: Brumar89 who wrote (13138)	10/19/2004 10:09:53 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Saddam was a great guy, handling Iran and following the advice of Blessed Glaspie. PS <I guess you haven't been reading very well> nor for very many years PPS He even handled those early iraqian communists, although he did not privatize all that oil.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (13138)	10/19/2004 10:10:11 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Dear Clueless, Re: For example, in the last post on the subject I cited Saddam's "past behavior and his record of statements and propositions made to other leaders in the region" as evidence of his likely future actions. OK, since you don't bother to read lets get some facts into your peabrane. First of all, Saddam Hussein became a CIA operative in 1959 and has been on the payroll ever since. In the 1960s, his role expanded from street thug to executioner with the CIA handing Saddam and his henchmen a list of 5,000 Iraqi leftists and secular progressives who were promptly butchered by Saddam for pay by the CIA. Are we beginning to get the idea here, sonny boy? In the 1970s, the repression of socialists, progressives and other various Iraqi patriots continued with the full force of Hussein's anti-democratic Ba'ath Party and full agreement by the CIA. Then, of course, after the overthrow of the repressive monarchy (another friend of the CIA) in Iran in 1979, the CIA and the White House went on a full charm offensive with Hussein and cajoled him into a bloody stalemated war with Iran, where the CIA and the White House provided arms and assistance to both sides of the fight in order to bleed both of them. It was a totally cynical maneuver by the cynics who run the U.S. government, and unsurprisingly, the American public did not have a clue what was going on. And unfortunately the blood was too hot on both the Iranian and the Iraqi sides of the conflict for those two neighbors to figure out who their real enemy was and is. I think they have that sorted out now. In the run-up to the first Gulf War, Hussein asked for permission to punish Kuwait from the U.S. Ambassador and was given total assurance that the U.S. "had no opinion on Arab-on-Arab conflict" (Amb. April Glaspie in conference with Saddam Hussein, July 25, 1990.) And then George H.W. Bush double-crossed Hussein. So, sonny boy, don't you even begin for a second to think you can get away with your superficial, ridiculously naive regurgitations about "programs and intentions". Who do you think you are kidding? No one on this board is as naive as you are. How in the world do you expect to convince anyone here, since everyone knows more than you do and is unwilling to fool themselves as you seem so abundantly suited to do. The guy who can fool himself is a special case. That's you. Or, as Warren Buffett puts it, "if you sit down at a poker game and haven't figured out by the third hand who the sucker is, it's you."

To: Brumar89 who wrote (13138)	10/19/2004 10:54:31 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Respond to of 20773

Btw, Mossadeg, do not forget to use just 3 minutes on Mossadeg search.yahoo.com The Iran Crisis. Mossadeg 1951 Man of Year, from Time 1952/1/1. Land of Turmoil, from Time 1952/03/24. 1951 - Mossadeg became Premier, nationalized BP oil fields ... 1953/5/28 - Mossadeg letter to Ike demanding more aid, in addition to the $23 million sent for 1952 ... ---- I am very sorry, that is an edu-link.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (13138)	10/21/2004 5:30:18 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

past behavior before everything changed and he was beaten in a war AND contained and we know he was contained, because the reports say he was contained... but you still really really believe that evidence doesn't matter hmmm yeah I call that more of the same He did NOT retain the programs, there was no evidence of them- no "tangible evidence"- and his retaining the "intentions" to restart the programs is just silly. If you are going to start going to war over intentions- you should probably kiss your behind goodbye now. No, I have no faith- not in you, not in Saddam, and certainly not in Bush. When there is no evidence for something, it usually is not there. That's logic. Pretending that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence is highly illogical, and goes against probability. You are a cheerleader for the war. You "believe" that SAddam was a threat even though he clearly was not- and you STILL believe it even though it is completely clear he had no weapons, and was contained. What can you say to that? You "believe" based on past behavior (which led to the war, and the decimation of his country) that the same thing is going to happen- even though there appears no shred of evidence that it could have- although Saddam had the intention (dream?) of doing it all again. Yes, Brumar,continue to sing in your choir of heavenly preemptive war. You don't need logic, you have faith.