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 (73833)	2/14/2003 11:44:12 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

A while back somebody (Nadine?) posted an interview with former members of the Clinton administration (off record?) who claimed that the goal of that administration was to ensure that Iraq never complied with the inspection process. Reason being was that once it did, sanctions would have to be lifted, and Saddam would no longer be under the UN's thumb, and would then be more dangerous than ever before. Arguably, and I would find this argument persuasive, personally, Saddam is at present the least dangerous he has ever been, and is becoming ever less dangerous, surrounded by US and coalition forces outside, with incursions into the perimeter, while the inspectors are inside. Even if this were really just a charade, it might be less expensive and more effective than all out war, I don't know.