SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: JohnM who wrote (77853)2/26/2003 9:12:41 PM
From: frankw1900  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
So, finally, I gather you are pinning your argument on Saddam's refusal to disarm. That's hardly even close to a reason to invade. It is certainly a reason to keep him pinned in, to make the sanctions smarter, etc. But not to invoke the devastation of war. Not at all.

OK. For sake of the argument. Who is going to continue "to keep him pinned in, to make the sanctions smarter, etc."

And whilst he is kept "pinned in" he will continue to murder and torture entire families and neighbourhoods. He will continue to starve the unfavoured parts of the population under the "smarter sanctions." But, of course, this isn't the same as the "devastation of war" and we certainly won't have invoked it. Right?

frank@onemilliondeadfourmillionexiled.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News