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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (233436)	4/4/2003 11:22:20 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Iraq has nothing to do with Islamist fundamentalism. Saddam's regime is/was a SECULAR dictatorship. You may have noticed that Iraqi women do not cover their faces. They go to school. They work. They drive. Saudi Arabia, a US ally, is far more of a breeding ground for Islamist fundamentalism. There may be other (better) reasons for invading Iraq. However, your "Not touching Iraq would embolden Islamist fundamentalism" is a very uninformed comment, and frankly, weakens the pro-war argument instead of strengthening it.

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (233436)	4/4/2003 11:25:08 AM
From: Terry Maloney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Haim, I agree with zonder.

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (233436)	4/4/2003 11:31:21 AM
From: Win-Lose-Draw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

if turkey and israel could cooperate - yes, big if - they could seal lebanon off from syria and cut off fuel for the hotheads that have taken up residence there. without the hotheads that swath of coastline strikes me as tempermentally and geographically a far better candidate for democratic rehabilitation. but it would require choking off the supply of nasty things from other meddlers in the region, esp syria. hard for sure, but to these eyes it certainly looks easier than what has been suggested for iraq.