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 (17609)	6/11/2005 1:53:05 PM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

Israel - but if they believed they were, and invaded Israel - preemptively - you would not complain, as they viewed Israel as a threat, just like you say the US viewed Iraq as a growing threat? LOL The whole thing is nonsense designed by people who like to be in wars. The US loves war. We say we don't and hate the casualties, but we love it. We now start wars. We provoke people, then start wars which cost hundred of billions. Defense contractors and suppliers make millions on each war, we run huge deficits, and the people running this country are very happy. They were upset - the right - all during the 1990s under Clinton because we had peace and prosperity. Everyone's lives and fortunes were improving, even the very poor. They didn't like it. They tried to start something with China in 2000. Then when 9-11 hit, they saw their opening. A War on Terror - to replace the 40 year Cold War. What a deal. Trillions more for defense and corporations, and lots of nice little wars - splendid ones to fight again. Lots of back slapping about how we are the greatest country in the history of the world. Lots of flag waving, complete with faux tears at ceremonies. Pathetic, makes me want to vomit. It is all a fraud, all lies. Damned lies. tsigprofit >> India - Pakistan: that could happen. Their security is their responsibility. Israel - Arab League: Israel is not a threat to the Arab League - its the other way round.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (17609)	6/11/2005 2:08:40 PM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

The Return of "Fragging"? 06.10.2005Justin Raimondo The deaths of Captain Phillip T. Esposito and Lieutenant Louis E. Allen, on Tuesday, near Tikrit, may be the definitive argument in favor of the view that this war is another Vietnam -- or worse. A report by CNN, just out, notes "the U.S. Army disclosed that it is conducting a 'criminal investigation' into [their} deaths." Here's what happened: "'The initial investigation by responders and military police indicated that a mortar round struck the window on the side of the building where Esposito and Allen were located at the time,' a military statement said. "'Upon further examination of the scene by explosive ordnance personnel, it was determined the blast pattern was inconsistent with a mortar attack,' the document states. "The Army is looking at a number of scenarios, including accidental death, attack by an intruder or infiltrator -- and fragging, which is the killing or wounding of a fellow soldier." There was a lot of this going on during the Vietnam war, as the historian Terry Anderson, of Texas A & M University, points out: "During the years of 1969 down to 1973, we have the rise of fragging -- that is, shooting or hand-grenading your NCO or your officer who orders you out into the field. The US Army itself does not know exactly how many...officers were murdered. But they know at least 600 were murdered, and then they have another 1400 that died mysteriously. Consequently by early 1970, the army [was] at war not with the enemy but with itself." A nation at war with itself -- who will win that one? *** posted by SiouxPal from his thread - very good post t