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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (34107)	7/11/2002 2:05:40 AM
From: jcky	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

carranza2, The one aspect that has always troubled me about this invasion of Iraq is that we don't have a "smoking gun" linking Saddam to any of these recent terrorist attacks. I would even settle for a "water pistol" right now to tie off the loose ends together to Iraq. So there's no leaked sources, no front line headers on the Washington Post or New York Times and no exaggerated details on Debka (perhaps Nadine can correct me if I'm wrong). There is simply this "axis of evil" proclamation from Bush, whatever that means. I am also deeply concerned about the financial burden and the consequent effects on the American economy a sustained occupation in Iraq would entail. It's no surprise American taxpayers will pick up the financial burden of this impending invasion. So we'll spend billions on the restructure and rebuilding of both Iraq and Afghanistan, and this doesn't even include our financial obligations to Israel. Is this really worth it? And I'm not even delving into the question of the many young American soldiers we are bound to lose in this invasion. You talk about the possibility of small nuclear explosions and bioterrorism with Saddam. I'm more apt to believe Saddam will use these devices as a last resort against our American troops or Israel, assuming they are now available, when he perceives there is no viable outlet out. When is a wounded animal the most dangerous? A wounded animal is most dangerous when it is cornered. Just ask any hunter. Frankly, a targeted military strike against Saddam leaving him crippled, but with full control of Iraq, seems a more viable solution than an invasion, occupation and restructure with no clear direction in Iraq.