Foreign Affairs Discussion Group 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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: dumbmoney who wrote (141085)	7/22/2004 7:20:33 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Nobody "knows" the future, but we base actions upon reasonable predictions all the time. I am not talking about a remote possibility, I am talking about a high probability. The only reason there was no current humanitarian crisis was the "no fly" zones. But a humanitarian crisis was looming, as Saddam diverted revenues from oil sales meant to buy the populace necessities, and used them to build palaces and missiles. It is estimated that up to half a million children died as a result of such diversion. How many more needed to die to constitute a crisis? As for "changing dynamics", of course they factor in as a motive to go to war. For example, if we think that a demonstration of resolve in one place is likely to make diplomacy more effective elsewhere, and therefore to diminish the risk of military confrontation overall, then it is may be worthwhile to "change the dynamic". If there are pressures to proliferate because neighboring countries are afraid of Iraq's capability, a fear which Saddam clearly encouraged, then it is worthwhile to take that pressure off, and decrease the pressure to proliferate. Etc.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next