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 : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Doug R who wrote (8459)	4/6/2003 12:05:02 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

OK, how would you remove him WITHOUT invading?

To: Doug R who wrote (8459)	4/6/2003 12:06:15 PM
From: eims2000	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

"There were no efforts to actually remove saddam in the last 12 years. There were efforts to contain saddam...not remove him." A real shame Doug. We should have finished it the first time.

To: Doug R who wrote (8459)	4/6/2003 12:54:48 PM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 21614

>>> There were no efforts to actually remove saddam in the last 12 years. There were efforts to contain saddam...not remove him.<<< Actually, no. There was a Kurdish rebellion and there was a Shiite rebellion. The US, although it encouraged this, did not back the rebellious efforts, in effect, leaving them open for slaughter from Saddam's military. The point I've been trying to make is if Saddam, either present or in absentia, were convicted for crimes against humanity, the door would then open for international support to back the efforts of the Kurds and the Shiites, and some dissident Sunnis, to overthrow the regime. Unfortunately, it's politically convenient for Bush, to "take Saddam down," thus serving to help achieve three distinct objectives: 1) Make Bush more electable for having solved this decade-old problem. I mean who wouldn't want to elect the man who shot Liberty Valance? 2) Lots of corporate elements within the Administration, especially the oily ones--will very well get greased. This money trail will eventually wind its way into political donations that'll help grab that tiny sliver of Middle American voters and thus help tilt the next elections to the GOPside. An added benefit will be new GOP fundraising efforts aimed at America's Jewish community, a demographic group which in the past has supported and funded the candidacies of Democrats. 3) The war action very well cloaks the bad economy and spares the administration criticism that otherwise would be front page news. If this war were a just one, we wouldn't have seen so many lies, distortions of fact, deletions of fact, plagerized material and outright misrepresentations presented in order to support it. Just think. The reasons for this war have gone from weapons of mass destruction to liberating the Iraqi people to Saddam's a threat to his neighbors to installing democracies in the Middle East. Whatever weapon that could be used, from a public relations point of view, to get enough of the American public behind Bush to prosecute this war has well been utlized. If this war were true and needed, the Bush Admnistration would not have had to keep changing the reasons for it.