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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (64524)	6/23/2002 10:36:56 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Zeev, My feeling is that we must take out el quaida, even if that means attacking the portion of Pakistan they are hiding out in. With Iraq, i would cut a deal, if possible, no terror weapons verified by inspections, no regime change from the outside. Also free pass on prior behaviour. He acts like Stalin--we need to treat him thusly with containment and prudence. Of course i know that Sadaam may not accept this but with the plans for attack in the making by the US and without a fanatics belief in jihad and death by the iraqis, he just might. mike

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (64524)	6/23/2002 2:14:30 PM
From: vampire	Respond to of 70976

Saddam may or may not have anything to do with Al Queda (but don't forget that "An enemy of my enemy is my friend"), but I think that if we (i.e. the U.S. government) has reason to believe that it is necessary, there is certainly plenty of precedent for an attack on the idea of "anticipatory self-defense" a few fairly recent examples include our attack on Libya in 1986 or 1987 (I forget) and Israel's attack on Iraq nuclear facilities in the early 1980's Hopefully we can convince our allies that it is "just" but if we can't...we can't

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (64524)	6/23/2002 3:05:00 PM
From: brightness00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

I agree with your sentiment. The very fact that El Queda is reported to be shopping for nuclear material in Europe is indicative that Saddam either does not have it or is not co-operating with El Queda. One argument for invading Iraq, besides the domestic political convenience you cited, is the possible alternative site for US troops in the Persian Gulf. The presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia is often cited as the cause for much of the discontent, if we can move our outpost next door to Iraq . . . Though personally, I think malcontents can always find someting to grind their axe . . .