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: zonder who wrote (51984)	10/14/2002 1:09:23 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

My preferences for what line foreign relations should follow, that is... Who doesn't prefer diplomacy over military force?? Certainly soldiers prefer it because it's THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE... I certainly prefer it... But diplomacy is a two way street.. There's a point in time when you get tired of talking until you're blue in the face and you find yourself required to take action... Don't you think 12 years of "talking" is long enough, especially in light of 9/11?? In order to properly fight this "war on terrorism" you have to eliminate and stabilize potential regions of tension. Iraq is certainly one of these, as is Iran and Syria.. and the Palestinians... But as we've discovered, the Palestinians are acting on the orders of Iran and Iraq which means that there will be no peace in that area until that influence is disrupted. Now.. I don't about you.. but if 12 years of begging and pleading, interspersed with moderate coercion, hasn't managed to enforce the resolutions against Iraq, I don't know what will... And the argument that Saddam's sons will inherit his office if we attack is ridiculous... Who do they think will eventually replace him when he dies of old age?? Hawk