SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (48)1/4/2003 2:55:12 AM
From: PartyTime  Respond to of 25898
 
>>>Washington concludes that it would be wiser not to go at all [to war] than to go it alone.<<<

It's sorta getting that way. Many have been the past weeks where FoxNews has reported: Turkey's with us to the North and the Saudis are with us from the South. Almost like: Rah-rah-rah-sis-cum-bah!

Never mind the quality to finding evidence of weapons of mass destruction; I've seen no evidence to indicate either Turkey or Saudi Arabia are firmly in the U.S. camp on a war with Iraq!

For sure, the Saudis would like to continue to take advantage of Iraq's inability to become a world-leading oil producer; and the Turks would just love the opportunity to put its army in control of the land of Iraqi Kurds. But I don't think there's any evidence such that either of those nations will be firmly marching side by side with those whistling Yankee Doodle in the midst of an invasion into Iraq.

Were Bush to go at this war alone he'd be sent to a corner, one he'd never get out of, by future historians. And leaders from nations almost everywhere would loudly spout the question: "Why'd you do that?"

Most rational thinking minds, including those from other nations, would conclude there's gotta be a reason to kill a million people. The reason to kill so many in World War II was that it was to end the war. But does America have to do this now in order to start what could become World War III?