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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (85241)	3/23/2003 4:59:14 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

That assumes that adopting a different policy 20 odd years ago would have led to a better situation today. I'm not sure I see that. SA is a repressive regime, but it is also one of the least dangerous major Islamic countries in the world. They have not taken over our embassy and installed a theocracy. They have not become a militantly aggressive dictatorship ruthlessly surpressing the population and actively pursuing the development of, and using, weapons of mass destruction, not to mention initiating wars both with two neighboring countries and within their own nation. So of the three major oil producing Islamic nations, SA appears to be the least dangerous to us and to its neighbors. That doesn't suggest to me a failure of policy. Not to say that we couldn't have done things better. Hindsight always shows ways of doing things better. But it doesn't suggest failure, either. At least to me.