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: Rascal who wrote (75270)	2/18/2003 5:33:33 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The people who do not want to immediately invade Iraq are not indicating their wish to"leave Saddam alone". No? Please explain their alternative strategy. Come to think of it, I didn't see one sign at those marches that even mentioned Saddam. #1 everybody wants to disarm Saddam The French sure don't, they have eviscerated all attempts. Proposals to just keep up the current inspections forever are not serious. The current inspections are a farce, and at that will only continue as long as 100,000 troops are parked at the borders of Iraq. No longer. #2 everybody wants the Iraq citizens' lot to be improved. The Iraqi expats definitely want this. But I didn't see one sign at the marches concerning the lot of the Iraqis, either.

To: Rascal who wrote (75270)	2/18/2003 5:39:29 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Personally, I'd feel a little oppressed if I had to live stuck in "intellectual glue" to the extent that the neocon / zionist hawks are. As near as I can tell, aside from general distaste for large scale killing, my own position is sort of what Nadine calls the Scowcroft "realist" line. That might or might not be enough to get me banned from the protest movement, hard to say. There was an article in fluffy old Parade magazine on Sunday which ranked the "10 worst dictators", by David Wallechinsky of People's Almanac fame. He put Saddam at #3, behind Kim Ill Duck and the Saudis, third Axis leg Iran didn't rank and unindicted terrorist co-conspirator Syria got a mere honorable mention. At the end of the little Iraq part, he had this interesting line: After the Gulf War, Saddam was considered over the hill as a global-scale dictator until President George W. Bush began to promote his status as a threat to world peace. And the promotion will continue for at least a few more weeks. Armament wise, though, Saddam still looks pretty darn over the hill. Aside from what was destroyed in '91 and during subsequent inspections, Iraq probably hasn't gotten significant spare parts for its remaining tanks or planes since '91. Last mention I saw, they were trying unsuccessfully to smuggle Mig-21 parts from the former Yugoslavia. I'd don't know, but I imagine a creakier military establishment would be hard to find.