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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (45393)	9/19/2002 8:36:11 PM
From: aladin	Respond to of 281500

Nadine, If we let the 'UN crowd' handle it - we will get at least 1 more year of stalling (otherwise known as weapons development time), before we can take a next step. However, if we position troops and act tough - Saddam may decide to live in a humbler role than he had hoped. Karen is an optomist - she feels that we can solve problems by talking about them. She forgets that the opposite of 'war is diplomacy by other means' is 'diplomacy without a credible threat to back it up is just so much hot air'. While we can argue whether or not Saddam is equivalent to Hitler (circa the late 1930's) - I think we can all agree he is at least a Mussolini or Tojo. Negotiations without any metel to back them up do not work on stongmen. Now the optomistic crowd that finds the use of force uncomfortable - they can argue Bush is getting the right results by blind luck. The republicans can think he is brilliant. Me - its just the effective way to deal with it. Just like only Nixon could go to China or Clinton could enact welfare reform. John