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: tejek who wrote (226039)	3/24/2005 2:50:03 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572629

ted, Re: 9/11 happens in 2001. Al Qa'ida claims responsibility. The American media reported that al Qaeda was the patsy, er, I mean perp. Howerver, Osama Bin Laden took no responsibility: khilafah.com So the American media had to come up with a crash-test dummy to play Bin Laden for the cameras: 911research.wtc7.net Curiouser and curiouser....

To: tejek who wrote (226039)	3/25/2005 5:35:37 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572629

No Tim, what I meant was that its not necessary to spend as much on defense against a non existent enemy as a opposed to an powerful one that is real and poses a threat. "Non-existent enemy" wasn't the issue, "weak enemy" was. And once again overstretch is about how bad the burden is and how much you can maintain it. If you pushing the limit and starting to overstretch yourself against a weak enemy you can pull back a bit. If your pushing the limit against a powerful enemy than you might not be able to reign things in and cut back the resources going to your military. Bush takes office in 2001. We had no known official enemies. 9/11 happens in 2001. Al Qa'ida claims responsibility... At that time we had been in a low level on and off conflict against Saddam for years, and Al Qaeda had already made a number of attacks against the US. Tim