SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Ilaine who wrote (81241)3/11/2003 2:24:33 PM
From: aladin  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
CB,

Its a classic argument, the actual reason for the impasse on this thread and at the UN today. As defined it states - War for defensive purposes only.

The counter-argument is that post-9/11 with enemies & terrorists trying for WMD, can we afford to wait?

John@leaningtoactionbutstillfeelbadaboutit.com



To: Ilaine who wrote (81241)3/11/2003 2:25:07 PM
From: michael97123  Respond to of 281500
 
Beware gulf of tonkin type incident to ignite this thing. Right or wrong something like this may initiate hostilities. Iraqs very moderate remarks indicate they are aware of this also at some level.
U-2 flights recalled
Controllers recalled two U-2 surveillance planes assisting U.N. weapons inspectors over central Iraq today after Iraq challenged the flights' authorization and sent aircraft to approach them. Iraq called the incident as a misunderstanding and said it did not take hostile action against the planes



To: Ilaine who wrote (81241)3/11/2003 2:34:25 PM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Meaning, if you follow these little one liners backwards, admittedly a bit of an effort, you will see that I'm simply saying that Nadine is no longer arguing that the only moral position is to invade Iraq. She offered a different reason.