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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gary Ng who wrote (68366)	3/8/2003 11:42:42 AM
From: JSwanson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

brushing aside UN The UN is brushing itself aside. Like I said before: Then why did the UN affirm all the previous resolutions regarding this situation? Why didn't they just say enough is enough we don't think Saddam is a threat anymore? The UN affirmed all of those resolutions and then didn't follow through. What's the point of the UN or its earlier resolutions if they have no meaning (i.e. they are not enforce)? Can anyone expect the UN resolutions to have teeth if they aren't backed up with the action outlined in the resolutions? Read the prior resolutions. caabu.org The UN affirmed 1441 and all of its predecessors in November of 2002. Iraq has not complied in over 12 years. The Gulf War cease fire was predicated on Iraq following these resolutions. They have not and more to the point Iraq has made the UN look totally ineffective and ridiculous. withdraw from treaties signed which he considers not good for him You should rephrase that to say "which he considers not good for the US." Look Bush, or any other President for that matter, didn't swear an oath to the world. It is sworn to the Citizens of the US to protect the US Citizens and uphold the US Constitution. Don’t be so naive to think that all the other countries are taking there stance for their own best interests rather that being benevolent “do-gooders.” Some actually might be but my bet is that most the others are protecting their self interests. France and Germany are large trading partners with Iraq despite Resolution 687. Do you think that might influence their decisions? You don’t think that Russia is withholding its vote because it wants something in return? How about Turkey and its decision to let the US use its land? Pentagon said he is now much weaker than he was during the last Gulf war First, that is irrelevant. That is not the standard that upholds the UN resolutions. Secondly, he may be weaker in a sense that is traditional military assets are not as strong, however, should he acquire the ability to develop nuclear weapons, Iraq would be virtually unstoppable in the Middle East and the world would have another North Korea to contend with. the most powerful nation on this planet Yes the US is and it has a record of providing a lot of good to the world at its taxpayers expense. Saddam is a documented liar, criminal and killer and the world wants to keep turning a blind eye to his actions. The fact that people around the world can actually think the all of the good that the US has done for the world and can still be thought to be more than dangerous than Saddam. It amazes me and I think its pathetic. JS