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: Condor who wrote (88281)3/31/2003 11:23:50 AM
From: michael97123  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
I understand your view. Did you earlier support the threat of force and the massive build-up that got iraq to cooperate with the UN in the sense of letting inspectors back in? If indeed you were opposed to the build up then there would have never been a process in the first place and iraq would have been allowed to develop and perhaps spread wmds. There is an illogic to that reasoning imo.
On the other hand, if it were proved that there were no wmds and the US knew it but proceeded anyway, i would declare our policy wrong headed. I think i am being far more flexible here viewing wmds as the crux of the matter.
Yes, i too want all wmds eliminated but i suppose we can agree that US nukes are less of a threat than iraqi poisons. Need to stop uncontrollable proliferation first, and then start the disarmament process again. Small steps first. mike
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