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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Geoff Altman who wrote (712838)11/13/2005 7:42:04 PM
From: Geoff Altman  Read Replies (1) of 769670
 
The majority of the world has already expressed an extreme dislike for this reckless leader..........

Say that now the President knows that this terrorist organization is an off shoot of Muslim Fundamentalism. Can he attack Muslim Fundamentalist without being condemned? Are they even just located in one country? No. He still needs to formulate a response while the world is still sympathetic towards the US because of 9/11.

He looks at the whole problem long term. He sees Kingdoms like Saudi Arabia where the lead players of Al-Qaida originated. He looks at the sheikdoms in the area where many terrorist foot soldiers are coming from and he decides one of the main reasons why fundamentalism is so strong has to do with the lack of any kind of democracy in the area and that small clans have the vast majority of wealth, majority of the country lives just above the poverty line. Syria has been called social democratic but it's hardly that. So the President decides that there are 2 things that would suppress the further expansion of fundamentalism. Setting up a true democratic style government where the gov't leaders are truly elected by the majority and the redistribution of wealth that would most likely come about if a successful democratic style Gov't where implemented. Not only for humanitarian purposes but since Iraq had already been weakened by a previous war and Saddam was still threatening the region he decides invading Iraq and removing Saddam from power to be the best response. He knows the solution is difficult and is not going to be easy sailing. I mean, these people have been more or less slaves of either a sheik a king or some other tyrant since time began. So empowering these people with democracy is not going to be an easy thing and will take time.

Now that he has a target and a viable reason (Saddam and WMDs) to invade Iraq he tries to build a coalition as his father did before him. Unfortunately, the previous coalition members, some having set up business arrangements with Saddam shortly after Desert Storm, don't care to join the coalition again and vocally oppose invading Iraq. Many oppose invading simply because they don't wish to draw the ire of terrorism on their own country. So the President decides to forge ahead with the few allies that America has that will help.

Iraq is in a key strategic position geographically so that if a successful stable democracy is developed it could have a stabilizing influence on other countries in the area.

So, what do you all think about the premise I've laid out. This is why WMDs are 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