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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (105931)7/17/2003 5:45:41 AM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
Who attacked the U.S. homeland? Any Iraqis? No, not a single one.

Saddam was permitting Iraq to be used as a transit, training, and safe haven for various terrorist organizations. (Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, etc..)

Saddam terrorized his neighboring regimes, threatening to launch invasions.

Saddam was such a threat that the US was required to spend $3 Billion per year "containing" him.

Saddam's military fired upon our military forces almost every day. He was a threat to our pilot's security.

Saddam was in violation of 17 UNSC binding resolutions. He remained a risk to regional and international stability (economically).. The UNSC resolutions all cite the need to maintain regional peace and stability.

But most of all, taking this action against the Baathists of Iraq has forced some major changes within other Arab countries. It has injected the US directly into transitioning the region from autocracy/dictatorship to viable democracies (even if only a parliamentary monarchy).

And that's why I'm against the war/occupation of Iraq, because that's not where the threat is.

I disagree. The threat is from Saudi Arabia and its Wahabbist cleric and supporters. But we CAN'T very well deal with SA, or force it into a near civil war between royals and clerics until the world has secured an alternative production source of oil that could replace SA's production capacity.

You don't fight a snake by attacking its tail. You maneuver yourself into position for striking it in the head. You destroy the legitimacy of the militant cleric movement by removing them from power over the holy sites of Islam.

And while I would prefer the Saudis do so themselves, I don't believe they have the resources or resolve to carry out what is required. But with US forces on their border, the odds are that they recognize that US support for their regime is fading and looking for an alternative in Iraq.

Hawk
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