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 : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: D. Long who wrote (4035)9/19/2001 11:53:32 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 23908
 
Like who?

And don't say Khameini... Iran has shown itself to be in transition from theocracy to democracy with the recent elections for Khatami (knock on wood).

Thus, I can't think of too many greater threats out there than Hussein and the terror network he supports.

Even Bin Laden hasn't had the balls to deliberately target a US president (though rumours were that they were targeting the white house on Tuesday). But Hussein did...

And btw, the other son is so crippled from the assassination attempt against him, that he's little more than a figurehead.

But most of all, he's been destabilizing the entire region and probably has the most advanced chemical and biological weapons program in the region.

And biological weapons are what we're all currently fearing here in the beltway.

Hawkmoon



To: D. Long who wrote (4035)9/20/2001 12:45:49 AM
From: Nadine Carroll  Respond to of 23908
 
I believe the chief reason we didn't overthrow Saddam in the Gulf War was that we listened to the Saudis, who are simply petrefied of a Shia power on their northern border, and who would much rather deal with the devil they know. So we left the poor Shia to rise and get crushed.

Why anyone thinks well of Colin Powell (or Bush 41) as a strategist is a mystery to me.