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 : Moderate Forum
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TigerPaw who wrote (5699)1/14/2004 12:23:28 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (1) of 20773
 
Saddam was no more dangerous than any of the other rulers of the Middle East, certainly not to America.

This is correct. But you misunderstand the issue. The issue isn't "Was Saddam a danger to us?" (answer: No). The issue is, "Could Saddam's removal be beneficial in eliminating future terrorist threats against us?" (answer: Absolutely).

Saddam was taken out because Americans hated him and clearly, there was support for doing so, and it would have the desired effect. It could have just as easily been the ruler of Syria (although, being next to Iran has some immediate benefits).

The point is that taking out Saddam is one way to bring about an end to anti-Americanism.
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