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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gersh Avery who wrote (297306)	11/10/2004 12:43:55 AM
From: Michael Watkins	Respond to of 436258

> $25k for each suicide bomber .. State sponsorship < Fine: If Israel wanted to react to this they could have unilaterally decided to try to take Saddam out. Or Israel and Egypt could have done it together, paying for it with some of the $4 billion in defense grants - yes, grants given to the two countries annually. Meanwhile, bombings continue with or without Saddam in the picture. Don't forget this is the same Saddam Husayn than Donald Rumsfeld two decades earlier was propping up, with the express support of the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan. This is the same Saddam who got a very nice letter of support even though Rumsfeld and Reagan knew in advance that Saddam was gassing Iranians. This is the same Saddam who had biowarfare precursors shipped to him, by the United States of America. Its the same Saddam who the State Department decided should get certain nuclear related materials shipped to it, just quietly and in behind the scenes since at the time the public were venting their spleen over Iraqi use of chemical weapons. Its the same Saddam the Defense department rationalized was doing a good job - paraphrased - "who cares if he uses chemical weapons against the Iranians, gas is just as dead as a bullet to the head". Government inaction or in action? The same people who were involved in building Saddam up in the 80's, moved on to beating him up in 1991, and now have brought us Iraq II in all its neocon glory, for the wrong reasons and without legitimacy, Meanwhile, international terrorists far away from Iraq or Falluja have a new cause to recruit new members. Meanwhile, Bush has squandered the massive support, goodwill and political capital earned by America through the grisly attack of 9/11. Clearly this neocon "Pax Americana" strategy should have had a stop loss executed long ago. I guess there are no traders in Bush's cabinet. > Saddam wanted to thumb his nose at the US in ways that we could not ignore .. we didn't. < Saddam did indeed want to thumb his nose but he had no capability to do anything of significance. He was not a threat to the US, certainly not an immediate or pressing threat by any means.