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: Bilow who wrote (56402)	11/10/2002 1:37:18 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

As I explained a few posts back, Iraq has no use for WMDs in the current military environment of the Middle East As I answered, Saddam Hussein has already given up 200 billion dollars of oil revenue rather than disarm as he agreed to do. Wouldn't you say that is proof that WMDs are worth quite a lot to Saddam? Enough to pay hundreds of billions of dollars for them so far. The real problem in Iraq, as far as the war on terrorism goes, is not the regime of Saddam Hussein, but instead the fact that US sanctions have made the place a breeding ground for hatred of the US Our big problem with Iraq is not anti-American feelings, which are not strong there anyway as they hate their government much more than us. Our problem with Iraq is Saddam, his desperate hunt for WMDs, his unpredictability, his aggression, his megalomania, and his general undeterability. Saddam is on record as saying that his big mistake with Kuwait was not waiting until he had nukes before invading - he is sure that if he had only had nukes, the US would have been deterred from trying to stop him. Yet you think the US should have no problem with lifting sanctions and letting Saddam get nukes? If we pull out of the Mideast as you advise, the minute Saddam gets nukes, he'll roll right over Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Third time's the charm, right? Letting Saddam get control of 25% of the world's oil seems a good foreign policy to you?