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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (21432)	12/17/1998 5:53:00 PM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I believe it was Prince Sihanook (spelling?) and Pol Pot. Eventually, there were two communist-backed regimes. The Vietnamese-backed one drove Pol Pot out, then eventually withdrew from Cambodia.

To: Charles Hughes who wrote (21432)	12/17/1998 6:12:00 PM
From: RJC2006	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<<It was common knowledge, in fact policy, that Lon Nol was our best bet in Cambodia. So what? That is my point. (You are too young to know who Lon Nol was, I'm guessing...)>>>> Charles, you miss MY point. I didn't say I agreed with this policy or that one. I did say that has BEEN the policy. <<<<Actually, there have been plenty of Arab and Kurdish and Iranian patriots willing to shed their blood for democracy. Typically, we make them promises and then let people like Saddam take them whenever it suits the Realpolitik theories and financial needs of the lamos who have run policy in this area in the past.>>> Charles, can I ask you something? Why the hell are we arguing about something that we both agree on? Why is it that you find it desirable to align my politics to those who supported Lon Nol? Why is that when my policy has always been to bomb the enemy back to the stone age and not support puppet dictatorships in a desire to find a political foothold you still misinterpret it?