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 : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (7496)	11/15/1998 10:43:00 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

L3, I have not an iota of sympathy for Saddam, he committed his first murder at the age of 12 and has not stopped since. My sympathy is with his people and my criticism was directed at our initial confusion, actually behaving ourselves like beduins ("the enemy of my enemy is my friend" in the triangle US, Iran, Iraq). I also was quite critical of our blood thirsty media, the poor slobs were disappointed they could not bring to our screens the horrors of a potential conflict. The report from Bagdad reminded me of vultures circling around a wounded animal in the desert, waiting for its last expiration. Zeev

To: Lee Lichterman III who wrote (7496)	11/16/1998 11:31:00 AM
From: HB	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

Lee, I've serious doubts about your account of why the US didn't march into Bagdad and take out Saddam; you wrote: <The world couldn't swallow those pictures and we had to abruptly stop the war due to weak stomachs of TV viewers. Regardless, Saddam signed a UNCONDITIONAL acceptance of our terms which was full cooperation. Not once, twice but at least 3 times over these past few years yet he keeps bluffing. I am sorry but I hope we go in again and finish this thing for good and keep the camera out> I didn't get that feeling at all about the general American public. (I did know people with that reaction, but I run in circles that are further left even than the "liberal elite" -g-.) I think Bush didn't want to push to Bagdad, for domestic political reasons (US public will care when the TV casualties are American) and, perhaps, for some kinds of geopolitical reasons (fear of what might replace Saddam.... power vacuum leading to regional wars or something). Weak stomachs of TV viewers weren't it, IMO. (Not to say I think we should have pushed to Bagadad... I don't know enough about Iraq, or war, to estimate the cost, in US & Iraqi lives, if we had. Cost to Iraq of Saddam is clearly huge, though. I do think we should probably accidentally bomb him, if possible--- although the question of what will replace him must be considered.) HB