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: Karen Lawrence who wrote (62548)	12/20/2002 6:24:16 PM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (1) of 281500

So what's your point? Are you replying to me or just posting stuff you found? There are intelligent arguments for and against US and allies invading Iraq. There are none in that post. Sidebar summary of Ajami's article: The driving motivation behind a new U.S. endeavor in Iraq should be modernizing the Arab world. Most Arabs will see such an expedition as an imperial reach into their world. But in this case a reforming foreign power's guidelines offer a better way than the region's age-old prohibitions, defects, and phobias. No apologies ought to be made for America's "unilateralism." My further comments (not Ajami's): Control of Iraq's oil is not an issue. The US can buy lots of oil. Al Qaeda is a symptom. It should be excised but it is not the source problem. As long as the basic problems in the ME remain, there will be al Qaedas. I mentioned Ajami's article because he summarizes those problems well. He also deals well with the difficulties and uncertainties of Iraq post Hussein and what they mean for the area. Ajami is a well informed muslim scholar and knows the area well. or at least, better than most journalists who write about it. I recommend you read it.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next