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: JohnM who wrote (45242)	9/18/2002 11:08:27 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'm tempted to say what I say all too frequently with you, Nadine. Just relax. You continue to think all this is a debating society, that the point is to score points. Not simply have a conversation. Whereas you often treat it as a classroom, with yourself as the professor. In short, you dish it out pretty freely, in suitable academic garb, but call foul when it's your turn to take it. jmho. I do not, however, believe they have offered any serious and credible evidence that Iraq is an immediate threat. Hawk has laid it out well, the geopolitical case is plain for those who wish to look. Containment is failing now; what happens if we try to keep it up for another four or five years? What does the situation look like then, when Saddam has nukes (as I don't think even you doubt that he will)? Saddam regularly threatens to destroy Israel and it would be the surest ticket to his heart's desire, hegemony of the Arab world. What happens to the US position in the world if we passively wait to see what happens? These are powerful reasons, but they don't fit on bumper stickers.