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.

Pastimes : WORLD WAR III -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: robnhood who wrote (24)	8/27/1998 7:39:00 PM
From: JJMM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 765

#1) The US thought he was better than the alternative (the ayatolah) when we supported Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war. #2) OK, I'll call it the "turkey shoot in the gulf" from now on instead of the "gulf war". Too bad we did'nt finish the job and shoot all the turkeys - particularly Sadam. #3) There are american children going hungry. My godson skipped breakfast this morning. The difference is his parents did'nt blame it on a foreign government. My point that Iraq using masses of starving children as a media platform when their army is well fed (and Sadam is building palaces) is just as valid. #4) You may not have been preaching but their is still only one side to this coin... The US needs to respond to terrorists and their supporters with swift and disproportionate FORCE. One sided media hype is BS. If anything, US media in many cases is duped into replaying Iraq's claims over and over again (the starving children is almost as good as the "baby milk factory" we bombed during the turkey shoot). I'd say most wars are fought for economic reasons - I'm not saying that this is right - it's just reality. The fact that our primary reason for the turkey shoot in the gulf was to maintain a reliable supply and supply route for the west's principal energy source is the same - reality.