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 : Attack Iraq? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (4696)3/17/2003 8:25:41 AM
From: Machaon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8683
 
<< Besides, if this whole thing were merely about oil, why wouldn't we just roll into Kuwait? >>

Good point.

The halfwits look at decades of Saddam's brutal behavior and say that he is not a threat. Then, they look at America's behavior of freeing Afghanistan from the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and then building bridges, schools and clinics; and the Antiwar halfwits remember that America saved the Kosovos from mass murder, followed by helping to rebuild that country; and then these halfwits stupidly accuse America of wanting to plunder the countries that America saves from despots.

Is the antiWar, appeasement group really that stupid, or has America's enemies found a group that are easy to dupe?



To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (4696)3/17/2003 9:07:27 AM
From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8683
 
Come and take over Canada....please



To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (4696)3/17/2003 2:06:52 PM
From: H-Man  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8683
 
And now I hear that some Shiite clerics are supporting the war. They say that war is just because America is on the side of an oppressed people.

Not this is of any substantial weight, only that it illustrates that how weak the more terrorism and no cooperation arguments really are.

In the end, the legacy will be a free and prosperous Iraq, an Iraqi populace that is thankful that Saddam is gone, and exposure of all of Saddam's atrocities. This will hardly strengthen the argument of the radicals.