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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (213689)	12/21/2004 12:14:30 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1578480

Attack on U.S. Base in Iraq Kills 22 Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:23 AM ET (Page 1 of 2) By Maher al-Thanoon MOSUL, Iraq (Reuters) - A mortar and rocket attack on a U.S. military dining hall killed 22 people and wounded more than 50 in Iraq's northern city of Mosul on Tuesday in one of the deadliest attacks on U.S. forces since the war began. The attack came as British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a surprise visit to Baghdad, where he vowed the war against insurgents would be won and elections would go ahead on Jan. 30. As he left Baghdad, mortars fell on the Green Zone compound, as they do almost daily. There was no word on any casualties. The Mosul strike came at noon when many soldiers at Forward Operating Base Marez, a huge camp built around the northern city's airfield, would have been eating lunch. The tented dining hall can seat hundreds of soldiers at a time, Reuters correspondents who have stayed at the base said. A defense official in Washington said it was not clear how many of the Mosul casualties were Americans. Iraqi National Guards and civilian contractors working in construction and security also operate from Camp Marez, in the south of Mosul. "There were an unknown number of rounds in a rocket and mortar attack," the official said. "We don't know the breakdown (of dead). We don't know if it's U.S., Iraqi, a combination." In the bloodiest previous single incident for U.S. troops in Iraq, two Black Hawk helicopters crashed in Mosul in November last year, killing 17 soldiers. At the start of the war in March last year, 29 soldiers were killed in a fierce day of fighting. Iraqi militant group Ansar al-Sunna, a known Sunni Muslim faction that has been at the heart of the 18-month insurgency against U.S. forces, said it was behind the attack. Responding to the attack, the White House vowed that the "enemies of freedom" would be defeated. On Monday, President Bush warned that Iraqi bombers were having an impact. Mosul has seen a surge in violence over the past six weeks, since U.S. forces launched an offensive against insurgents holed up in Falluja, an assault designed to break the back of the guerrilla movement operating in the country. Problems first resurfaced in mid-November when groups of militants overran more than a dozen police stations in the city, Iraq's third largest, looting them of weapons and other equipment and then setting them on fire or blowing them up. U.S. military commanders have said Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who is allied to al Qaeda, probably fled Falluja ahead of the U.S. offensive there and may have shifted his base of operations to Mosul. Continued ... reuters.com

To: i-node who wrote (213689)	12/21/2004 2:11:14 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578480

re: The key to saving SS is to get the investment returns up to 7% rather than the current levels, and to have the money growing over an extended period of 100 years. Privatization, in stages, will allow this to happen. It is a matter of providing some necessary bridge funding now, perhaps a couple trillion, in order to avoid a $60 trillion problem down the road. So you plan to privatize all of SS in increments? That's going to be a hell of a lot more than $2Trillion. Where are you going to get the money? Without raising taxes? There is no $60Trillion problem (if you had your way we would create one). There is a future problem at the margin that is easily solved. Since your "conservative" (hahaha) values are so incensed by SS, which is currently running a surplus, why are you not wringing your panties out over the Bush budget, which is currently running at a record deficit? John