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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (10325)	2/19/2003 12:32:07 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

>>>``Any fallout of war is certain to be dwarfed by the terrible consequences of America's walking right up to the edge of war and then stepping back, letting the Iraqi dictator work out the terms of another reprieve,'' wrote Ajami.<<< All Bush had to do was present to the region a sufficient military build-up in order to enhance the inspection process. Now he's fully committed to a point where every time he says he wants peace it's an outright lie. No, he won't appear like a boxer in the ring who runs immediately back to his corner the instant the bell ring. Do you remember the sounds the Zulu warriors made? Well, that's what's echoing inside of Bush's brain right now. And everytime he hears this he's got Wolfowitz, Perle, Armitage, Rove and Rumsfeld beside him ringing a bell of a different kind: Get out there! Yes, since the army has arrived it'll be used. That's usually what happens. Interestingly, it comes back to the original question that began this thread: What if Blix and his inspection team refused to leave Baghdad--would Bush bomb them? I think that would stop the war because were he to bomb with them there, the whole world would declare war on the United States, if not militarily it will morally. The other option is for the pope to take up residence in Baghdad. I don't think he'd bomb the pope. Other than that? Well ....