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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gerard mangiardi who wrote (291846)	9/3/2002 10:36:20 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

The problem revolves around the dependence on weapons of mass-destruction to change the status quo. Whether the Iraqi's could consolidate gains (i.e., hold territory), they could do a lot of damage trying. It is true, we do not know if the opposition can manage to hold the country together, but almost anything is likely to be an improvement. The redundancy that Saddam built into his command and control systems, that held things together even after extensive bombing, was quite sophisticated, and although the conscript army was a paper tiger, the Iron Guard was a formidable opponent. Add a few nukes to the mix, or chemical warheads with good medium range missiles, and Israel is gone, which means that the main force capable of checking Saddam regionally will be out of the way. Take out a couple of Iranian cities, to create chaos, and the major immediate rival is out of the game. Etc.....