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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (204513)	9/27/2006 10:06:09 PM
From: GST	Respond to of 281500

<_Almost four in five Iraqis say the U.S. military force in Iraq provokes more violence than it prevents.> news.yahoo.com

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (204513)	9/27/2006 10:12:30 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hawk, there was a border dispute with Kuwait and Saddam solved it in the time-honoured way, having consulted with the USA for a very good reason. Self-defence is a legitimate act [according to the USA]. Massive and overwhelming force is an approach adopted by the USA to such conflicts. So Saddam adopting USA strategy to manage disputes seems fair enough. If he had consulted me, instead of April, I'd have given him some different suggestions. Actually, if you walk drunk past a policeman and he lets you get into your car and drive away, I'd say he was giving you a green light and he was irresponsible to allow you to drive drunk. Saddam, the Shah and Suharto were all concerned about likely USA reaction to actions they were planning and checked beforehand, no doubt delighted to find they had green lights. Saddam's one was, I believe, a trap. Suharto's green light was a strategic anti-communist approval. The Shah's was an approval [that was for price increases of oil which is great for oil producer company profits]. You will agree that none of them bothered consulting me, or even my government. That's because a green or red light from NZ, or me, is irrelevant. One from the USA means something. A red light also means something, as Iran is very likely to find out. China is sure to think carefully before invading Taiwan as an orange light is flashing from the USA. Your comparisons with common criminal behaviour are poor analogies. From a legal point of view, getting a green light is not a lot of use in many circumstances, but from a practical point of view of what one can get away with, it makes a big difference. A nod and a wink enables a LOT to happen which The Book and cold light of day would not allow in a court of law. <If I walk up to you with fisted hands and you don't warn me against hitting you, does that mean I have a "green light" to beat the crap out of you?? > It's not me doing the warning. If the police/powerful people standing around give a nod and wink, and turn away, then yes, you have got a green light. Mqurice