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 : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (21964)	12/17/1998 2:51:00 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

IQBAL,>>> so far Lott and others who know very little of realities on this ATLANTIC are falling into this trap.. <<< I do not diagree with you on the nature of Saddam Hussein. However, Bill Clinton has no solution and no will to resolve the Saddam Hussein situation. Air strikes via cruise missles and bombers have no effect on Saddam Hussein. Iraq is a big country. A few hundred missiles or manned sorties will only destroy some buildings, some important infrastructure, kill a number of innocent Iraqis and inconvenience a lot of Iraqi people. We have no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They are being held hostage by Saddam Hussein. They are given no alternative to his dictatorship. If they rebel, they risk their lives. Saddam Hussein has had ample time to hide relevant documents and important assets. He is now hiding his own ass(et) safely in some bunker probably monitoring CNN. The bombings will stop - but Saddam will go on. He does not have to answer to his people, shareholders, or board of directors. If he is a few quarters late with his development of weapons of mass destruction - that has little meaning. He will be there after Clinton leaves office (one way or the other). Clinton is probably smart enough to understand that this military action will do little to deter Saddam Hussein. The real benefit is that he delays his own impeachment for a few days. The big mistake was made by George Bush when he did not end dessert storm by ending Saddam Hussein's regime. It will take another Dessert Storm to rid the Iraqi people of Saddam Hussein. Clinton is not the commander in chief that has the kind of credibility to mount that kind of an offensive. Clinton is only good at doing interns - not dictators. Don't confuse the issue. Mary

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (21964)	12/18/1998 7:37:00 AM
From: SARMAN	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 50167

Hi Iqbal I always liked you view, commentaries and advise on this thread. However I am replying to that message because somehow you failed to see the reason behind the attack on Iraq, especially that your origin is from that region. If you recall in the late 70's early 80's Anwar Sadatt sign the Camp David agreement that brought peace between the Egypt and Israel. Few month later Anwar was shot by one of his army officers. The role of Anwar was done. He served his purpose and there was no need for him anymore so the USA liquidated him. Now you think the mighty USA does not have a single person that could kill Saddam. But the roll of Saddam is not over. If the USA kills Saddam, his death will create a power vacuum in the Middle East. Iran will invade Iraq and from there to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. As bad as Saddam is, he is not but a puppet for the USA. But unfortunately, only innocent people pay the price with their lives. In the USA the public relations machine is in full steam. But people do not understand, that to get rid of a dictator you do not need to kill babies. My friend, I know that know what I am talking about. Politics in the Middle East is for the highest bidder