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 Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (3528)	2/7/2003 11:03:14 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

(1) Iraq has no WMDs --> no need for an invasion Then why all the deception and harassment of the inspectors?? Why the deception between 1991-1995, when Saddam's son-in-law ratted him out and reveal tonnes of chemical weapons being hidden?? (2) Iraq has WMDs --> see report My "report" (as conveyed in any number of posts on this website.. :0) states that NOT dealing with Saddam NOW has even FAR GREATER consequences than confronting him now when he is at his weakest. Example one would be N. Korea and the level of incitement and aggression we're seeing out of Kim Jong Il after the US confronted them over their violations of the 1994 treaty and continued nuclear research... I mean.. now we have Jong threatening to "pre-emptively" strike any US forces that are sent to South Korea... We have him threatening to rain nuclear fire on the US (and it's allies).. All this belligerence, in order to make himself unignorable, and he doesn't even control any of the world's oil supplies... I can only imagine what will happen when Saddam obtain nuclear weapons (possibly with North Korea's assistance), and how he will demand that all Arab nations acknowledge his hegemony over them.. (with his own threats of raining nuclear fire on them if they don't comply)... How will the US, let alone the UN act then?? We WON'T, Zonder.. We simply WON'T act... We'll be placed in a position of seeing the West and Middle East locked into a Cold War. Because if WE won't confront Saddam, how can we expect any of his Arab neighbors to do so?? I don't know how any invasion of Iraq is going to play out, except that Saddam will be defeated. But I AM reasonably sure of even greater consequences if we put our heads back in the sand and let him defy the United Nations resolutions and continue developing these weapons... The sad thing is that none of this would be happening right now had we bit the bullet and overthrown Saddam in 1991. An ounce of prevention then, would have prevented a pound of cure now.. But fail to act now, and that "pound" will turn into a "tonne" when Saddam declares he's joined the nuclear club and he wants the best seat in the joint. Hawk