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 (123935)1/28/2004 8:25:08 PM
From: Sam  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Nadine,
Some of the "anti-war" crowd believed Saddam had WMDs; it was the CIA who said that it was unlikely that he would use them unless he was invaded.

But as I'm sure you recall, the "anti-war" crowd covers a lot of people and a lot of different arguments. The most serious arguments (for me, at any rate) had to do with (a) the real enemy that we should focus on is Al Qaeda and (b) once Saddam was removed, there still would be no good way to leave or establish a situation which would be favorable to our interests. Civil war was always the likeliest outcome, over a period of years. Too much history of blood and repression there.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News