Foreign Policy Discussion Thread 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 Policy Discussion Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: zonder who wrote (4668)	2/26/2003 6:09:28 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) of 15987

The other, which I am trying to stress here to no avail, is that if Saddam is "an evil man", than he always was. Irrelevant to the current situation. And who's basing the argument to force Saddam to comply with UN resolutions upon the fact that he's an "evil man"?? He is evil.. And it's a controversial position to state that we'll permit him to be "evil" to his own people, and to be the lesser of two evils (Iran during the '80s)... The ebb and flo of global power is not so clear-cut... But the reason the US has such solid moral position to deal with Saddam are the 17 binding UN resolutions that Saddam has ignored during the time the US/UK have been required to "contain" Saddam (without UN assistance or sanction). We have better things to be doing, such as draining the swamp that created Islamo-Fascism.. And defeating Saddam and rebuilding Iraq is only the first step.. So being "evil" or not is not grounds for supporting or invading a country. Never said it was.. But Iraq is still technically in violation of the UN cease fire agreement. Thus, Desert Storm has not truly ended. In fact, this invasion might be called Part Deux. (except that it's french.. :0) Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next