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 (454)	3/19/1999 9:07:00 PM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 765

<<If you say we are doing it for the good of our oil supply (naked aggression)--- well now that is different ---- certainly different then some trumped up humanitarian concern for kurds or shiites.... >> I certainly would call it "naked self interest" in protecting a very vital energy source. Naked aggression comes in where you attack a neighbor without provocation in order to take what is theirs, sorta like what Saddam did to Kuwait and threated to do to Saudi Arabia. In our case, we're using force to guarantee that the oil keeps flowing. If you want to call that aggression, then I would argue it is justified aggression, I like electricity and I like driving my car, I dont know about you. I am in no way naive about our motives in the Middle east. The no fly zones were allegedly set up to protect the Kurds and Shiites in north and south Iraq who were getting kicked in the butt after they tried to revolt. We unfortunately didnt look to much into the possibility that Saddam still had a substantial reserve to quash revolt, oops. As to <<They're not even the same colour as us....>> I'll take it you're a fan of the "blood and soil" clique? ;)