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 : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (1280)	3/17/2003 7:19:01 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 7936

Yeah, but are you willing to pay for it? It costs many billions to keep those troops and all that equipment over there. And the UN isn't paying one thin dime. The only reason the US military is over there is to depose Saddam. If there was a side benefit of scaring him into some sort of weapons destruction before the war, Bush would take it. It was not necessary to put 200k troops in the Gulf to scare him........he already knew what we are capable of. And, if Saddam is left in power, what? Keep the US Army parked there until he, and quite likely his son and successor Uday, are dead? No, keep him disarmed......its worked for 12 years; why not until he dies? Its not like he's 20. Somewhere in here it makes more sense to go in and settle matters. To you but not to me.......war makes sense only as a last resort. We are nowhere near that place. ted