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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (22093)	3/17/2003 8:47:27 AM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

So, if true, the USA and its allies will be saving many Iraqi children's lives by removing Saddam and therefore the sanctions.

To: zonder who wrote (22093)	3/17/2003 9:07:10 AM
From: Machaon	Respond to of 25898

<< You can argue the sanctions were in place because of Saddam and hence he is indirectly responsible for the deaths that took place due to sanctions. >> Indirectly? INDIRECTLY? Oh. I might have missed your main point. I thought that Saddam was the leader of Iraq, and therefore "indirectly" responsible for the welfare of his people. You are saying that Saddam IS NOT directly responsible for the welfare of his people? Oh. Saddam is spending billions on palaces, and billions on his weapons of mass destruction programs, but you say that, his wasteful and dangerous spending is not effecting the welfare of his people? Why are sanctions placed on Iraq? Well..... it's because Saddam refuses to stop developing weapons of mass destruction. << However, you cannot seriously claim that sanctions caused no deaths. >> Good point. Saddam is not to blame for the sanctions. Saddam is not to blame for spending billions of weapons of mass destruction and billions on his many palaces. You're really saying that the welfare of Iraqi people is the responsibility of America and not Saddam. No one should hold Saddam responsible.