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 : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stormweaver who wrote (4649)	4/20/1999 12:34:00 PM
From: Augustus Gloop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

<<Wrong. Saddam was left in power as a petty, powerless, yet defiant little dictator for a reason. This allows the U.S. to maintain a significant military presence in a strategic region, as well as give the military a live environment for training.>> Then why this question? It would seem to me you've got the answer. <<So, tell us what hundreds of US soldiers died for in the 1991 Gulf War?>>

To: Stormweaver who wrote (4649)	4/20/1999 2:01:00 PM
From: Yaacov	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17770

James, Saddam is also needed as a check against Shiite Iranians, and keeping them as far away from Israel as possible! In absence of Saddam, shiite pro-Iranian can takes over in Iraq. Together with Iranian, they can form an alliance with Syria that are Alewii's (very close to Shiites!) and endanger the Hashmite Kingdom of Jordan and consequently, the State of Israel! Last but not least, there is the Kurdish question. A weak central government in Bagdad, could unify Kurds in Norhren Iraq with Syrian,Turkish and Iranians Kurds. A Kurdish war of independence the can engulf the whole region!