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 (37420)	8/12/2002 10:30:36 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Whew, what a day. Do we have allies? Well the non-intervention folks have almost got me convinced we don't have a friend in the world and that intervention is doooooomed. That we will have to wait for that second attack. Maybe you have connected the dots after all - all I can say is - You go girl - :o} I second the motion -g-

To: BigBull who wrote (37420)	8/13/2002 1:53:52 AM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

>>Well the non-intervention folks have almost got me convinced we don't have a friend in the world and that intervention is doooooomed<< Selective hearing then. Some non-interventionists mention the opposition of allies, and some are concerned with other factors. Assuming we all refer to the same set of reasons is like the presumption that everyone's a kneejerk conservative or card carrying liberal. Few people fit such simple molds. As for moi, I don't suggest intervention is doomed. I simply consider it to be extralegal, that it bears a potential cost that may be greater than non-intervention, that the argument for haste is flawed, that the political motives are suspect (probably the real reason for haste) and, worst of all, the guiltiest parties in Iraq stand a reasonably good chance of the least harm coming to them.