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: Techplayer who wrote (14350)	4/18/2003 12:22:22 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

Are you completely unable to write anything but trite statements that you know must be untrue. Perhaps you think it is provacative. you obviously support the former iraqi regime Obvious to who? your RWE support group? I'm tired of that childish tactic and am on the verge of no longer responding to your posts. why it would have been best to let it stay in power? That is not a foregone conclusion, but even if it were likely that Saddam stayed in power, the precidence of having one more petty weak dictator is less dangerous to the world than total anarchy. To premptively strike when not threatened is a pretty good sign of anarchy and it leads to a much more dangerous future than does yet another dictator whoes words exceed his abilities. why diplomacy would have worked Diplomacy didn't have to work. Saddam was not the threat he was made out to be. A little verification was in order, as it is with all other countries who have the technology to create largescale mischief. TP