Attack Iraq? 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 : Attack Iraq?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: GROUND ZERO™ who started this subject	3/15/2003 3:58:18 PM
From: Doren	Read Replies (1) of 8683

Just for the hell of it I’m going to debate your side of the issue to show you how it could be done and how the bungling Bush Administration could convince many people. ________ First let us acknowledge that both sides agree that Saddam is a heinous murdering dictator. Both the pro-war and the anti-war factions have good intentions and good arguments. 1) Saddam will not negotiate unless he feels threatened. The troops that are ready to invade are the only reason he is ready to show and destroy any of his weapons. We cannot keep the troops there indefinitely, it is hurting out economy and it is a disservice to the troops. 2) Saddam holds between 13% and 30% of the world’s oil. Enough to blackmail the worlds economic and political institutions. It is unacceptable for a dictatorship with a track record of aggression and political repression to have such power. 3) We have made mistakes in the past after toppling regimes, and supporting dictatorships. In this case we will, after the war, install a government elected by the UN for a period of 5 years, at which time there will be general elections. The profits from oil sold by Iraq will be put into a trust fund. The Oil Company itself will remain in UN hands until it is sold to private parties with the approval of the elected Iraqi government. -------------- This argument doesn’t answer why a dictatorship like the Saudis get away with power and repression but it would sway a lot of people. Sort of like when Nixon wouldn’t admit the cover up. You know he would never have had to resign if he had admitted it. Like Ike, I thought Nixon was a terrible politician and a weak human being. But the dufus would have survived and even had a legacy if he had told the truth. That’s what bugs me the most about Bush. He’s a big liar and not a good one.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next