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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34915)	7/24/2002 12:47:58 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 281500

it looks like the Bush administration is looking for a patsy, err, a peacekeeping partner, to shoulder the burden. They might even succeed in finding one, for Afghanistan. That's one advantage of a multilateral effort. If we make a unilateral move on Iraq it will be very hard to find another patsy, especially if the one in Afghanistan is starting to find the role frustrating. it cannot be put back together except through a superior power who offers the warlords the choice of sign up, or die. But where do we find the power? No foreign power will want the responsibility. What domestic force could fill the role? Organized Islam, maybe, but they've been down that road once already, and it wasn't nice....

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (34915)	7/24/2002 2:48:47 PM
From: jcky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<< Good questions, which strongly imply that we won't be leaving anytime soon, though it looks like the Bush administration is looking for a patsy, err, a peacekeeping partner, to shoulder the burden. >> If we invade Iraq, US taxpayers will end up being the patsies, again. Iraq isn't going to be another simple "hit and run" military escapade. Aside from the usual questions pertaining to the restructure of Iraq post-Saddam, are you worried about a double dip recession? If Bush invades Iraq, I'll bet we get one.