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: paul_philp who wrote (68263)	1/24/2003 12:36:45 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Paul, Interesting. I suspect we agree more than we disagree, though we clearly disagree on the one fundamental of whether to invade Iraq right now, without widespread UNSC support. And, I suspect, we also disagree as to just whether the rhetoric of the administration contributes to their goals or makes them more difficult. This point, however, I'm struck by. Nothing is possible while the Israleli's and Palestinians count their down like football scores. Cutting off Saddam's money, arms and moral support to Arafat can give the US some leverage over both sides. American unhindered by the UN and EU could be bolder in their 'negotiations'. I think that Bush might be able to get himself into a position to get treaty drafting rights. I would like to disagree with the "nothing is possible" part of that post because I don't see a resolution of that for some great length of time. It looks to me as if, and I know you disagree with this, Sharon's actions complement Arafat, Hamas, and other groups actions to continue to drive a downward spiral. I'm afraid the emotional level and the memories are such now that a settlement is something to be wished for but not expected. The only thing that would change that is if the Bush folk forced a viable Palestinian state on Sharon. I can't see that happening. I would hope things could proceed on other fronts before then. We should also remember that the primary target for AQ rage is Saudi Arabia. I think 9/11 was a recruitment drive for the lost souls of Saudi Arabia. I think it was much larger than that. I still like Doran's argument that 9-11 grows out of a civil war but I think bin Laden had taken that to a civilizational level by then. If he got a civilizational response--US sees itself as going to war against all Muslims, the immediate product would have aided their aims in Saudi Arabia, certainly, but also in Egypt. Remember much of this started in Egypt. Also in Pakistan where they are probably closer to serious power than anywhere else. And I think it's obvious they underestimated the degree to which they were vulnerable in their base. As for another attack, they certainly seem to be trying. And, whether one favors an invasion of Iraq or not, there is no doubt such an invasion increases the likelihood. I notice that Gary Hart is arguing we have not done enough in this country to prepare for such. (Note to Bill: I certainly don't mean FBI agents on every corner of peaceful demonstrations. I mean serious work.)

To: paul_philp who wrote (68263)	1/24/2003 1:31:05 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Nothing is possible while the Israleli's and Palestinians count their down like football scores. Cutting off Saddam's money, arms and moral support to Arafat can give the US some leverage over both sides. American unhindered by the UN and EU could be bolder in their 'negotiations'. I think that Bush might be able to get himself into a position to get treaty drafting rights. Iraqi money is more public. But it is still peanuts compared to EU aid to Arafat ($50 million per month, as opposed to about $25 or $30 million total from Saddam), Iranian support, and support from various Islamic "charities". The most dangerous terrorist group is Hizbullah, who get $100 million a year from Iran. This is why the Israelis have traditionally considered Iran a greater enemy than Iraq. So in sum, cutting off Saddam's funding to the PA won't do much in itself.