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 (36860)	8/10/2002 2:25:55 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If he took the trouble to describe the smoking gun, bit of paper, satellite photograph, or intelligence report that has convinced him and the rest of the administration of the need for "regime change" in Iraq, I am convinced that support would follow, not just in the United States but the rest of the world. My guess is because the case we would make would not make the world any happier. It goes something like this: 1. We know Saddam has some WMD (chemical and biological) and is trying to make nuclear. 2. We know that even if he let the UN weapons inspectors back in, they couldn't find all of them. 3. We know that almost every hot spot in the world is in some place where an Islamic population is struggling against a non-Islamic population (Sudan, Chechenya, Palestine, Kashmir, Xinjiang, Iraq.) 4. We predict that the struggle of Islamic nations to form a coalition which is anti-West will only continue. 5. We don't perceive Iraq as being fundamentally stable. 6. The thought of WMD in the hands of Islamic extremists scares the bejeesus out of us. 7. Iraq is right in the middle of the Islamic nations, geographically, and if we stablize it with a pro-West government that will allow us to divide the Islamic nations from each other. Divide and conquer, or at least divide and not be conquered.