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: zonder who wrote (13865)	2/28/2003 7:08:02 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 25898

Sorry but I am not going to reply to the likes of "Do you believe Saddam is an honorable man?" which has no bearing on the issue of whether or not Bush has shown convincing proof that the Iraqi state supported and/or still supports Al-Qaeda. What does Al-Qaeda have to do with this?? So we're alleging Saddam has interacting with Al-Qaeda, but evidence is NOT YET conclusive (or is so highly classified because of sources and methods that we can't release it). But we're not going to war against Saddam because of Al-Qaeda, but because his regime has a history of supporting terrorism (other than Al-Qaeda), and PRIMARILY because he's continue to fail in complying with UNSC resolution 678 through 1441. The US could have taken military action against Saddam at ANYTIME PRIOR to 9/11, but we just couldn't justify the expense or the international political cost of engaging in unilateral enforcement of UNSC resolutions. And it's not like we had an administration who was particularly intimidating to the rest of the world. But since we were the ones who were attacked Zonder, not Monaco, we're not going to permit the "old" Europeans, intent on defending their incestuous relations with Saddam, to avoid dealing with his regime and creating the necessary change that is holding back both economic and social development in the region. Would you have invested large amounts of money there in infrastucture projects over the past 12 years were it not for the US presence in the region?? Given the constant political risk of a resurging and vengeful Saddam, I wouldn't... We're going to "drain the swamp" that has created Islamic Militancy. And frankly, that's the only way to stop Islamic militancy from spreading. Drain the swamp, develop the land, and create a new vibrant economic reality for the people of the region (to extend the metaphor). And yes.. some people are going to die along the way Zonder.. I hope as few as necessary amongst the innocents, and as many as possible amongst the "guilty"... And no.. it's not particularly civilized. But world civilization is founded upon the civilized using uncivilized acts to force the uncivilized to comply or die... But the governments you seem to find legitimate relied upon the old truism of "the strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must". That, in sum, is the way of the world you and I live in... I can accept that.. Can you?? Btw, I am rationally debating this issue. I obviously just perceive it through a different filter than you do.. one that is obviously more Nietzschean and Hobbesian than your's.. And I'm just more cynical and jaded about the concept of "civilized behavior".. It's a learned behavior, and not instinctive. And severely uncivilized behavior cannot be dealt with by civilized methods. Hawk