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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mishedlo who wrote (106160)	1/7/2010 3:59:45 AM
From: Elroy Jetson	23 Recommendations Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 116555

The beginning of all of this nonsense was US support and training of a jihadi army of people including Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and supporting them with weapons and money. We also enlisted Saudi Arabia's help in this. Some twisted souls thought this would be a good investment of taxpayer money in order to cause problems for the Soviet Union. Now our taxpayer funded jihad movement has come back to bite us in the butt. Who could have guessed that would happen? Look at how much it cost the taxpayers to clean up after their training and support the CIA provided Manuel Noriega. Now it's even more costly to clean up after our US trained jihadi army. People in the US would do well to learn how to mind their own business. .

To: mishedlo who wrote (106160)	1/7/2010 4:34:30 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

Even IF the "Religious/Historical" argument is true, the only solution is mass extermination of all Muslims. Are you promoting that? Some idiots here probably do but I bet you don't. Who's promoting that? I haven't read ANY comments on this thread suggesting a genocidal war against Muslims (and I concur that would be idiotic, if not racist). This struggle is against Religious Militancy and I personally don't care what faith that it represents. But the current battle is against a very well established and theologically deep Muslim militant movement. For that matter, what distinguishes the Radical Muslims from say the likes of Pat Robertson who advocated murdering Chavez. I'm no fan of Pat Robertson, but he's not a political leader. Furthermore, Chavez is a despot who's causing considerable misery to his people. Now.. Have Robertson say that Muslims must "convert or die", then you're right.. he's become a militant and I'd be happy to see him "neutralized". But most Christians would not approve of such statements and he'd effectively neutralize himself as a religious leader. And btw, we have our Christian militants. They're the ones who blow up abortion clinics. After 911 Iran (yes Iran) volunteered to help us find those who did it. The US government turned down that offer of help. Yeah.. they held Sa'ad Bin Laden, Usama's SON for almost 5 years... THEN THEY LET HIM GO!! en.wikipedia.org We apparently (hopefully) killed him in Pakistan last July. Is that the sign of a "helpful" Iran?? Releasing the terrorist son of the leader of Al Qaida?? And was it helpful of Iran to supply weapons, and sanctuary to both Shi'a and Al Qai'da linked insurgents that were tearing Iraq apart? (I can personally confirm these reports, and also that some of our high-level analysts analysts were ignoring such evidence): understandingwar.org Makes a lot of sense if Iran's ultimate intentions were to control Karbala and Najaf, the religious heart of Shi'ism. Moreover, I believe the vast majority of Iranians would welcome a warm relationship with the US. And I certainly would encourage a warm relationship with IRAN. Of course.. This is NOT about Iranians. This is about the Iranian government and it's religious fanatics who believe they are on a mission to usher in the advent of the Mahdi. THEY WANT A WAR WITH THE WEST, BUT WHEN THEY ARE READY. The Iranian people, for the most part, just want a better life. That's why I'm so elated to see the demonstrations taking place within Iran and we need to support it in whatever way possible to the extent that we're not seen as trying to control it. We HAD the world's sympathy after 911. Sympathy doesn't save people's lives or solve problems. You can seek temporary sympathy and lip service if that makes you feel better about being a victim. But that doesn't solve the problem. That requires having a greater will than your enemy and humiliating their effort in the eyes of their recruiting base so they see that "Allah is NOT with them". And, in case you forgot, a GOOD PART OF UNDERMINING THE US WAR EFFORT WAS DUE TO CURRENT PEOPLE IN CHARGE OF OUR CURRENT GOVERNMENT. Have you joined them? Hawk

To: mishedlo who wrote (106160)	1/7/2010 4:58:20 PM
From: skinowski	Respond to of 116555

Let's assume that BOTH theories are valid What is the winning policy? That's the $64K question. In trading, the reading and interpretation of the chart or the fundamentals will determine what is the appropriate action - and result in a win vs. a loss. If you believe that we are destined to keep making stupid mistakes and keep stepping on people's toes and piss them off, if you think that our national interests would be best served if we stay out of international affairs, then we need to get the heck out and go home. On the other hand, if you think that the Islamist extremist "Vanguard"is truly a serious revolutionary force, and may potentially come to dominate most or all of the Muslim world -- in that case, you may want to be more proactive, and search for ways to stop them. As you do so, you'll be making mistakes - no doubt about that. But if you respect the opposition and take them seriously, you've got to try things. I think that we have been dragged in into a religious war, and this happened during a period in our history when we are so secular that we don't even understand what this term really means. Moreover, the great irony is that we aren't even truly a party to that war. Ultimately, the real warring sides are "moderate" Islam against the extremists. Those extremists are in fact revolutionaries fighting for political power -- and they would use that power to radicalize today's moderates.