New FADG. Message Board - Msg: 23650358

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 : New FADG.

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Sam who wrote (1893)	6/25/2007 11:23:56 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) of 4152

But action without a due consideration of the likely consequences can also be "very, very expensive in the long run." Witness Iraq, just to take one current example. True enough also. However, inaction can also be very, very expensive. How would you feel about have a sanctions-free Saddam Hussein armed with nuclear weapons obtained from AQ Khan and North Korea threatening to invade Kuwait and Saudi Arabia again and financing terrorists all over the place? France would be enjoying its sweetheart deals, and Russia would be cleaning up as Saddam drove up oil prices. Both would be enjoying their bonanza of bribes from Saddam. The US would have had to ignominiously give up the no-fly zones, so Saddam could massacre the Shia and the Kurds to his heart's content. That was the most likely outcome of inaction. Sanctions were crumbling fast as Saddam spent oil-for-food money to good effect. All one has to do to get this scenario is project the typical past behavior of Saddam, France and Russia forward in a sanctions-free environment.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next