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: Spytrdr who wrote (36005)	8/5/2002 3:26:23 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

so once again you are admitting that the issue is not really the stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction per se, or the lack of democracy as you know it in Irak, or Saddam's personal characteristics. Apparently you flunked your ESL coursework. My point was EXACLY THE OPPOSITE. I don't worry about France or Britain possessing Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical weapons. I worry about NON-DEMOCRATIC regimes with a history of using those weapons against their own people. If they show little remorse about gassing their own people, what, other than brute force and confrontation, will prevent them from using them against us, or other neighboring nations?? And what's the political and economic cost of having to continue "containment" of Saddam when even the current presence of US troops in the region creates discontent. Yes... Stalin was a monster. But the only reason we formed an alliance with him was because Hitler had ALREADY invaded Russia, and we were all fighting the same enemy. One more point.. The US could have CRUSHED Stalin, had we wanted to. We had the troops, we had unopposed nuclear superiority, and we knew that it would only be a matter of time before we were forced to confront Stalin... But the US decided to end the war in Germany due to lack of public support. And we, and the rest of the world paid the price for decades to come, physically, economically, and politically. I would rather avoid reliving such a scenario where Saddam or one of his sons is able to unify the Arab world behind them. And that's what will happen if Saddam obtains nuclear weapons. The Arab governments will all travel to Baghdad to pay homage and pledge allegiance to him out of fear they will be nuke should they oppose him. And he will be seen as the only power able to create military parity with Israel, spreading his nuclear umbrella over Arab nations who can then feel more secure in waging conventional/uncoventional war against the Jews. Hawk