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: LindyBill who wrote (72851)	2/10/2003 2:00:39 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<I think the only way Saddam can get out of us occupying Iraq, (and it is just about down to that as a needed war plan) is to leave. > Lindy, Saddam isn't really the problem. He is only slightly different from the other murderous mullahs and megalomaniacs strewn across the Moslem world. The Islamic ideology is the problem. It's a very macho superstition. If Saddam leaves, that'll leave Uday or some other dictator in charge, who will, in an attempt to assert his authority, cause a LOT of murder and mayhem. The situation would likely be a lot worse than if the USA just left Saddam in charge. I think regime change needs to mean a change in government style. Namely, a division of Iraq into self-managing culturally distinct regions, with a constitution and some supervision for a decade or two while civilization is adapted too, oil production is kept up and other problems in the middle east are sorted out. Leaving Tariq Aziz in charge [or whoever is handiest with a pistol at 3 paces] isn't a recipe for civilization and stability. Like all good politicians, George II is about to do the opposite of his stated intentions prior to power = Nation Building. The exigencies of conflict tend to move people off their plans. Mqurice

To: LindyBill who wrote (72851)	2/10/2003 2:12:45 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If nothing else.............................. This entire Operation will have accomplished the following: 1. Proved to any Nation contemplating Terrorist operations or supporting Terrorists that they will be met with force and destroyed if they do not stop those actions 2. A magnificent display of the speed , power, and capabilities of the US Military in doing the job 3. A much needed "live" ( realistic ) practice for joint operations and cooperation between our various Armed Forces and those of supporting countries and rapid deployment for that day when the first serious global attack needs instant response 4. There will be no delay and arguing as to who will respond first and lead a counterattack- it will be the US 5. We find out who our real friends are who will support us especially among the Arab nations in the event it is one of them who shoots first - recognizing there will be zero time to wait to get organized and respond before they could be loading their 2n nuke into a launch facility 6 This thing could end without war as long as Bush retains the "loose canon" reputation in the eyes of terrorists everywhere . He must never appear to back down 7. A truly great practice operation for both the UN and NATO highlighting how they must change and act faster in the event a "real" attack occurs on a member Nation 8. If Bush is "stopped" by UN or NATO actions, or their willingness to take over the actual job of dis-arming Saddam,and yet retains his fiesty attitude this could end without a war and still present the needed picture of our unbending determination to end terrorism wherever it occurs. If that occurs, (we dont invade Iraq) we may never know whether it was one of the most Magnificent Bluffs in history or whether Mr Bush was dead serious. Sig (at keepemguessing.com)