Mario wrote:
>
> Did you miss the fact that the US has invested a lot
> in lives and taxpayer treasure to liberate and
> secure the nascent democracy in Iraq, while many
> other countries did nothing to help, and many
> hoped, and still do, that the US led coalition
> would fail?
>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:46:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
The US is?on track?to repeat what it did in Vietnam.
Declare victory and go home.
>
Mario responds:
>
Just to correct the record, and in keeping with the
title of this thread, the US did not declare victory
in Vietnam.
>
The real but negated US victory in Vietnam was
confirmed much later by Viet Cong Gen. Giap who said
in his memoires that he was shocked when the US pulled
out just when they had his forces on their knees
because the anti-war Democrats in the US Congress
succeeded in cutting off funding for the war.
>
US policy in Vietnam was vindicated by the wanton
killing fields in Vietnam and Cambodia after the US
withdrew when the supposedly benign "freedom fighters"
massacred some 2 million innocent Vietnamese and
Cambodians who opposed them.
>
The US victory in Iraq will not be confirmed by
anything the US says, but by whether Iraq continues to
be a stable and diverse democracy that can defend
itself against the Islamic radicals and the Arab
dictatorships on its borders.
>
Mario previously wrote:
>
> BTW, when I questioned how one could make decisions
> in 1997 - 2001 based on historical charts in 2008,
> it was rejected as "inappropriate".? Actually, in
> 1997 the price of gold had been dropping for the
> previous ten years and the US was running budget
> surpluses and gold prices stayed at about the $280
> level until 2001.
>
Mervyn responded:
>
Yep, when the US economy is well managed, everybody
wants the US dollar. Clinton and the Democrats
brought?prosperity to the USA. When the US economy is
in shambles, people turn to gold and the US dollar
value heads for the toilet.?Almost everyone on?Goanet
is?aware of this.
>
Mario observes:
>
Mervyn,
>
This is only relevent to Goans because you chose to
make it so and because the dollar and gold are still
important to all of us. Which is why facts and logic
are important, as compared with anti-American and
anti-Iraq-liberation idealogy and rhetoric.
>
You still haven't explained the REAL secret of your
success in picking the bottom of gold prices, if in
fact you did so without counting on your incredible
luck. I did not understand your detailed explanation
to Roland based on price charts in 2008 to pick prices
in 1997-2001. I doubt he did either.
>
No one in 1997-2001 had any way to honestly predict
what happened on 9/11/2001 and its aftermath.
>
Now you tell us you knew something that even Clinton
and the Democrats did not know at the time. To see
this you would have to be familiar with Clinton's
first budget proposals in 1993 which showed $200
billion deficits throughout the budget projection
period.
>
It was the subsequent and previously unforeseen
technological breakthroughs in microchip
miniaturization, portable PCs and mobile phones and
the dot com bubble that took place in spite of
Clinton's massive tax increases, not because of them,
his massive cutbacks in defense spending and failure
to respond to Al Qaeda attacks throughout the 90's,
and the Republican "Contract with America" after the
2004 congressional elections that controlled wasteful
federal spending led to the budget surpluses in the
late 90's.
>
This had all dissipated by the end of his term and he
left his successor with a declining economy, a rampant
Al Qaeda emboldened by his failure to confront them,
and the country open and vulnerable to the sneak
attack on 9/11.
>
The Bush income tax rate cuts in 2001-2002 led to a
massive increase in federal income tax receipts but
where he and the US congress failed badly was in
controlling wasteful federal spending, plus they had
to rebuild the US's defense capabilities after 9/11.
This led to the deficits and a corresponding increase
in the money supply which has devalued the dollar and
made gold more attractive.
>
