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: LindyBill who wrote (48297)	9/30/2002 1:21:26 PM
From: GST	Respond to of 281500

I don't like nuclear proliferation. I don't like terrorists. But I also don't like to see key elements of foreign policy developed without giving them some public debate. Every time you try to pin down the justification for invading Iraq it gets really sketchy. I don't like all that dodging about. I think the justification is simple, although far from noble -- perhaps that is the reason I don't like such a moralistic tone being attached to our actions. I think the justification of our actions is simply this: It is not in our national interests to tolerate a hostile regime with nuclear capability sitting on top of the world's largest and most accessible oil reserves. I don't think Saddam's current weaponry matters one bit. I don't think this has anything to do with Kuwait or the Kurds. All of the reasons typically given are marginal pretexts. The prospects for nuclear bomb-making are however another matter entirely. This is a threat -- and a very serious one at that -- despite his having no nuclear bombs today. The issue is WMD proliferation, not our moral or political superiority.