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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (105861)	7/16/2003 8:40:23 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Yes, that is explicitly the NeoCon agenda. I don't think it is, but either way its not relavent to my question. You said - " In Kuwait in 1991, we had total military control of that tiny nation. We chose to re-install the Emir. We could have made him a powerless figurehead, and held elections for a government that derived its powers from the people, but we decided not to. Who would have stopped us? Who could have?" I replied - "Should we install new governments any time we help a country out with military force? We had a lot of military in Saudi too should we have driven M1s into Riyadh?" I didn't ask if it was part of the Neocon agenda. Is it part of your agenda. And if not then why do you make an implied critism of US policy for not kicking out the Emir. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next