Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Good-The Bad and The Ugly -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bald Eagle who wrote (3061)	10/16/2000 12:38:37 AM
From: bob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8686

A few of Bush's reasons may have been... Support from Arab nations was shaky at best. Going after Saddam would more that likely caused a lot more Iraqie civilian lives...(Saddam was/is a coward and would hide behind his own mother) This would not set well with the Arab nations. Bush/his advisors may have thought that the damage done to Saddam and his republican guard was substantial enough that he would be overthrown by his own people. To blame Bush or Clinton for Saddam IMO is unfair. I feel sorry for the next administration that has to deal with him...and any like him.