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: BigBull who wrote (37253)	8/12/2002 11:43:12 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I think we have to anticipate some nationalistic sentiment.... However, I wonder how many Iraqi army units will choose to fight if the US advises them to "stay in the barracks or die" given the drubbing they took last time around.

To: BigBull who wrote (37253)	8/12/2002 12:03:36 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi BigBull; Re: "Then how do you explain that 3/4 of the country rose in open revolt against Saddam in '91." In 1991, the United States was in Kuwait City to liberate Kuwait. Many Iraqis felt that invading Kuwait was wrong. Our showing up in Baghdad is a horse of a different color. But I'm not that concerned about the initial attack. I think we can push over the Saddam regime. The problem is in what happens after that. It's the common complaint of a lot of people that there is no exit plan. (1) The possible destabilization of Saudi Arabia, which would very likely become Islamic Fundamentalist; (2) The revival of Islamic fundamentalism in Iran, which would be the primary source of the weapons used to fight us in the guerilla war in Iraq; (3) The breaking of friendly relations with the US by other countries, possibly Europe. I really don't know how to express this. Nations that invade other nations without sufficient provocation are "rogue states", and even if they're super powers (like the Soviet Union), the rest of the world organizes itself so as to control the rogue state. You don't want to go there. And "sufficient provocation" is not something that is determined by the state that was provoked. The rest of the world doesn't give a s--- what you or I think about our justification. The rest of the world makes up its own mind and acts accordingly. When the US went against the wishes of most of the world and escalated in Vietnam, the result was a diplomatic and military disaster. Maybe you don't remember this, but the US used to get out voted at the UN over and over again. Right now we're more or less on friendly relations with the rest of the world. We can't worsen our good relations with Iraq, that is not a worry. The problem is soiling our excellent relations with the rest of the world. -- Carl