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: Clarksterh who wrote (90604)	4/6/2003 1:45:49 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<The reality that all of this things, from the moral to the banal, probably played a role. The only question is wieghting.> Clark, we agree. I get irked by the self-serving assertion that "We are doing this for the Iraqis". Of course there is a wide range of things King George considered in making the decision to invade. I doubt even he could say what the weighting was - we don't work like that and the drives which make us tick are sometimes hidden from us. Sure, we know more or less why we do stuff, usually. But saving Iraqis from Saddam is lower on the list than is claimed. What is weird is that big bosses want to be loved, as well as getting all the money, the girls, the palaces and enjoying a spot of sadism if anyone bates their praise. It seems that Americans also want to be loved as well as getting the oil and control. Let's not be greedy. Let's just modestly do a good job of dealing with the malevolent monster and if Iraqis also praise that, that's a bonus. Where are the cheering mobs of Iraqis? Will we be hailed with flowers and kisses from the pretty Iraqi girls? Oh damn! Sulk. Of course, once the smoke has cleared, then people will be more demonstrative. My personal support for ousting Saddam and co wasn't to do with weapons of mass destruction, it was more to do with eliminating viciousness from the world, and creating a situation for improved international relations and United Nations development based on individuals' voluntary exchange of value. To promote the millennia-long process from tribal territoriality, alpha-male dominance, serfdom, confiscation and cruelty to individuals living in voluntary association. I am not surprised at the UN being sidelined as useless - a spot of failure and destruction often precedes essential improvement. The failure and destruction shows the need for improvement. I think I'm going to get my new Saddam and sadism free Iraq, a revamped, reconstituted United Nations [but only a half-baked one as things aren't bad enough to make the world get its act together] and reduced Islamic Jihad. Not to mention CDMA in Iraq! And Globalstar. Those were low on my priority list though [I hadn't thought of them other than in jest until the Senator pointed out that GSM was being planned]. Motivations are complex in these circumstances but are NEVER altruistic. The primary drives are self-preservation and self-interest. If there's mutuality of interest, that's great. The USA is primarily interested in self-preservation and self-interests. And King George II did, I am sure, include in his calculation that Saddam is NOT going to have a go at Laura and get away with it. Mqurice