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 Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (149472)	8/12/2002 11:01:11 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580236

Absolutely not. And there was nothing in what you quoted that indicated he was. But the quote is no more no less than what the former ambassador is advocating. I'm not sure why anyone would care if we go to war with Iraq. It is going to be totally sanitized, with minimal loss of civilian life or our military. And we rid the world of a huge problem. Suppose we kill a couple hundred Iraqi civilians in the process. Isn't that a relatively small price to pay for ridding the world of a tyrant? I am not sure how to rspond to this trivialization. We are attacking because he presumably has WMD, but it will be a relatively bloodless war, by your account, because Saddam will not use the world threatening WMDs in his last stand? The reason for not attacking are far more complex anyway. Al

To: i-node who wrote (149472)	8/12/2002 11:09:44 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580236

<These people have particular motivations for their statements -- Tony Blair obviously can't commit to a war a priori -- George Bush hasn't even done that. And the Saudis have a mighty thin tightrope they have to walk here. Obviously, they are motivated by different factors than this former ambassador. Dubya hasn't committed? You're kidding. The issue isn't if, its when.

To: i-node who wrote (149472)	8/12/2002 11:11:16 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580236

The United States made a horrible mistake when it allowed this to happen without swift, immediate retribution -- including a military buildup in the Gulf if necessary. But now that we have competent management in the White House, we must do whatever is necessary to get control of the situation pursuant to the terms of the ceasefire agreement. How can you say we have competent mgmt when its the son of the guy who didn't take out Saddam when he had the chance?

To: i-node who wrote (149472)	8/12/2002 2:44:31 PM
From: g_w_north	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580236

<I'm not sure why anyone would care if we go to war with Iraq. It is going to be totally sanitized, with minimal loss of civilian life or our military> Saddam has to be dealt with somehow but if you think a war would be sanitized your crazy. He will withdraw all of his troops into the cities to fight door-to-door. Remember, he thinks he is the second coming of Nebuchadnezzar and will do anything in a 'last stand' scenario. Troops would be positioned within civilian homes and the world outrage would be 100 fold that of the Afghanistan bombings.