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: KonKilo who wrote (71732)	2/6/2003 6:43:17 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

How do you figure that Iraq will be destroyed by inaction? Examine Saddam's track record. If you do not think that Iraq under Saddam, or his sons, will come to a very bad end, you haven't been paying attention. Either his neighbors will destroy him, or he will eventually mount a challenge we CANNOT decline, at a point where the costs will inevitably be higher, or the country will fly apart upon his death. If fear of Iraq after a US invasion should give you pause, then fear of a rampant Iraq armed with WMD or coming apart at the seams WITHOUT a stabilizing power in occupation should make you crap your pants. Since I represent an opposition view, I must be either morally suspect or craven? Come on, Derek, those are from the administration's worst side "you're either for us or you're against us" tactics and will not wash in a rational give and take debate. You've written nothing to contradict my appraisal. Your main argument against invasion to me has thus far been "it will be ugly afterwards." Fear. From our position as undisputed world super duper power, we have nothing to fear from anyone, except the thought that we will be fighting the war on terrorism to the end of days if we follow our present line of eradication only thinking. We have nothing to fear from anyone? LOL! That is laughably naive, as if September 11th didn't completely and utterly dispel that notion. We have MUCH to fear, which is precisely why this President (who came into office an isolationist) has been forced to make us seriously re-evaluate the threat matrix of rogue states and non-governmental actors like Al Qaeda. Actively opposing terrorism is a whole new concept to us and will require whole new ways of thinking to find a solution, IMHO. You don't oppose terrorism by hoping they will go away, or ignoring those who actively assist them against us. Terrorists can not be appeased, and they don't care about whether or not the President is Democrat or Republican, nice guy or mean. We are in a race against the clock at present, to win the first round. We don't have time for niceties, it's time to break some eggs, make a few omelets, and give us some breathing room for the heavy dose of "Soft Power" to be administered in large doses. Derek