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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (113076)8/27/2003 4:15:06 PM
From: GST  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
I agree completely -- they had a really tough job to do and did it extremely well under very tough conditions. Saddam needed to be dealt with, and the renewed inspections were a step in the right direction. Inspectors provided most of the reliable intel to come out of Iraq after 91. Their presence on the ground in Iraq was worth a hundred times more than the self-serving gossip of the Iraqi exiles that Bush relied on for intel. The US needed to do two things: get off the unilateralist track and make the best use possible of the inspectors while tightening the noose around Saddam within the framework of the UN. Instead, we pointedly insulted the inspectors and denegraded them at every opportunity, declared ourselves to be unilateralist as a matter of policy, and then attacked our allies for not rubber-stamping the immediate invasion of Iraq and blamed them for making the UN "irrelevant".
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