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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (61969)	10/9/2002 4:19:00 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

In its report, the CIA concludes that years of U.N. inspections combined with U.S. and British bombing of selected targets have left Iraq far weaker militarily than in the 1980s, when it was supported in its war against Iran by the United States. I agree but a weaker Iraq is an easier target and the justification for the attack is not the conventional military power of Iraq as much as it is the WMD program which has now gone on for several years without any inspectors to get in the way. If Iraq thwarts the resumption of effective inspections, the CIA report also makes obvious that continued airstrikes targeting suspected armaments facilities would make far more sense than a costly, risky full-fledged invasion. It would be cheaper and less immediately risky but it requires us to have a good idea of where the important facilities are located. Also an active reactor or a large chemical dump in or near a city might not be a good target for aerial attack. Tim