Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bilow who wrote (56516)	11/12/2002 12:47:33 AM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) of 281500

By 1998 it became apparent to him that the objective of the US was "regime change" not disarmament. That meant that he would have to suffer inspections forever and that sanctions wouldn't be lifted until he left power. When he figured this out, the motivation for continuing the inspections went away, so he quit cooperating with them. No, by 1998 it became apparent that sanctions were not going to be lifted while he just pretended to stop building WMD. And he was unwilling to stop. So why continue the farce especially with a world which didn't seem to care except to continue the sactions. There is an assumption that Saddam Hussein would not have been stopped were it not for the actions of the "world's policeman". This assumption is untestable, but probably not true. Lawbreaking is punished even in frontier towns that don't have a "policeman". Instead, they have vigilantes. As soon as the frontier town gets a policeman, the citizens quit organizing posses, and instead let the policeman sort it out for them. ???? Like Hitler? He did eventually get stopped but imagine the lives saved if the English and French had put their foot down with Czechloslovakia. or even earlier. This really amazing thing about a lot of agenda of the left is how self-serving it is. The non-interventionist agenda seems to be at least as much about 'not getting involved' (i.e. why should we put ourselves out for those other guys) as it is about 'letting people determine their own destiny'. Nah, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will get nukes too, and then they'll have a "Mexican Standoff", just like the US and USSR had, or that India and Pakistan have now. Well, I certainly hope you are kidding. Even if Saudia Arabia started now with a bomb program you can't seriously think that they could catch up. And it isn't like Saddam would just let them catch up and then attack. Certainly patience and fairness and restraint are not among his virtues. Clark

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next