Moderate Forum 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 : Moderate Forum

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: tsigprofit who started this subject	5/10/2004 6:53:45 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) of 20773

Regardign the atrocities that were sure to come in Iraq: To: From: X the Unknown Monday, Feb 17, 2003 9:15 AM Respond to of 25857 Hitler was not contained when Chamberlain was "appeasing" him. Saddam is not invading anyone. He has no credible link to 9/11. The only thing he has done it not cooperated as fully as we would like with 1441. That is not, imo, enough moral justification for war against the Iraqi people. It isn't Saddam who will be sent out in khaki to fight us, it is ordinary Iraqi soldiers who would probably prefer not to fight. Just like the ones we buried alive in trenches in the last war. There ARE atrocities in every war, and we've committed them in every war. That isn't so bad if the war is just, and you have exhausted avenues for peace, and there is a real reason for war. There appears to be no satisfactory reason for this war. What exactly are our "own interests" in this matter? Not fighting terrorism. That dog won't hunt. And Iraq doesn't pose a danger to anyone at the moment. So what exactly is "our interest"? At this moment I would think it really ought to be securing our country against the real perpetrators of 9/11, who aren't in Iraq.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next