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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (99384)	5/29/2003 4:05:49 AM
From: frankw1900	Respond to of 281500

But he's got this sinking feeling I try not to commit the intentional fallacy, myself. Before the US invaded Iraq, I said it would have to be there a long time. I also said the only really good reason to topple the Iraq regime was the nature of the regime. I still think so. The US has done Iraqis and the world a good deed. It's a bit early to say the US outcome in Iraq will be like that of the venture in the Phillipines. Empire can bring freedom ???? As the writer says, the second British Empire outlawed slavery where ever it went. I think it's not an exaggeration to say that the Hussein regime, if it did not enslave Iraqis, certainly kept them in an unfree state. The regime certainly disposed of the citizens in any way it felt like. You say you expect the US to behave in the same way. This is extremely unlikely. There are such institutions as empires of freedom. ???? Such a thing can be thought of. As long as we don't expect them to be perfect they can probably exist. I certainly preferred to be in part of the so called "American Empire" and not in the Soviets'.