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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (166818)	4/8/2003 3:47:58 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583680

I, too, saw Iraq as a negative but so what? There are a lot of nations like Iraq. There are lot of nations like Iraq ins some way or another but few or none that combine all the aspects. North Korea is worse in a few ways but there is no easy way to solve that problem. Other countries have potential to be as bad as Iraq but haven't gotten there yet. This is a ridiculous argument for two reasons: 1) there are other cutthoat dictators in the world who bring great anguish to their people. That's the big argument now since finding major caches of WMD is looking less likely. Secondly, what does it matter; if they are bad, why stop with the one? What's to prevent from going after one country after another? Is that what you support? The point I was making........with many nations, its not hard to find a reason to put them in a bad light. What do you think Hitler did? He said he was invading nations to make them atone for past sins......real or alleged. If they where alleged then he was just lieing. If they where real then they where in the past. As I said history. The problems with Iraq where not history when we decided to invade. What happens if we don't find major stores of WMD? Were Blair and Bush lying like Hitler lied to his poeple? All this is is administration pablum.......you want to believe it, that's fine but the attack against Kuwait was over 12 years ago. The statute of limitations ran out long ago. Iraq was "convicted" in the first gulf war, and it's punishment was the sanctions and the duty to cooperate with inspectors. It "escaped prison" by not complying with the terms of the cease fire and now Saddam's regime is being brought to justice. No statue of limitations applies. The sentence has been increased because of the escape and for "bad behavior". And for what crime........because they got a 'speeding ticket' or the equivalent? Its looking less and less that they violated the UN resolution in any significant manner. Or if you want to speak directly instead of with criminal justice analogies, the old policy (sanctions and pushing inspections) wasn't working. It didn't totally contain Saddam and it just made his people suffer (more then the war has and there was no reason to think the suffering would end for many more years). Something else had to be done and the positives of this action outweigh the negatives. If there are no major stores of WMD found, it was working. ted