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: Fred Levine who wrote (68488)	3/11/2003 3:03:26 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

the current inaction of the UN is terrible. For the U.N. to not consider war as the first choice is not the same as inaction. There are many things that can be done and should be done. The biggest problem in this whole conflict is the idea that there is only one right way to handle it. There are many ways, most of which are more right than an unsupported and unprovoked invasion. TP

To: Fred Levine who wrote (68488)	3/11/2003 3:48:46 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

While the "Iraqi" Kurds have a case against Saddam, I suspect that the "Turkish" Kurds might have a similar case. It is not that anyone thinks Saddam isn't rotten, but it is that there is so much rotten in the Middle East and the world that it is hard to believe that one case needs to be singled out for war. If the well being of the Kurds was a concern, we could arm them and train them and create an IDF like force which could defeat Saddam. Don't hold your breath. US policy has two objectives: promote oil flow to the US, stifle the flow of terrorism to the US.

To: Fred Levine who wrote (68488)	3/12/2003 6:19:30 AM
From: zonder	Respond to of 70976

Are you surprised that a Kurdish leader in Iraq has an interest in seeing US oust Saddam for him, possibly leading to a sovereign country for himself? how can we justify continuing slaughter of Iraqis without taking the necessary action Which continuing slaughter? I know about Saddam gassing Kurds once. I believe it was related to some uprising he was trying to supress. If you are trying to make a case for invading Iraq as soon as possible, using "continuing slaughter" as your main argument, you will have to show where this slaughter is.