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 (99919)	6/2/2003 8:30:14 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

2. We withdraw, and the Iranians, Turks, Syrians invade, to partition the country. They fight each other, and the various armed Iraqi groups, endlessly. And you think these rival factions don't know that too?? Do you think they know what might await them if the US pulls out? Right now, the various parties are willing to make trouble until the US pays attention to them and doles out the dinero to those leaders directing these dissidents (or acknowledges their position of power). But they don't want the US to leave anymore than they want the Baathists to return. We stay. 5 years from now, 500,000 U.S. troops are barely keeping a lid on a nationalist guerrilla uprising. One million (more) die before we give up and go home. Supplied by whom? Syria? Saudi Arabia? The Turks? Hardly... Syria doesn't have the money, and the others have no interest in seeing the Shiites in power. Saddam really did have WMD. And he really did move them into an adjacent nation. And then into a container on a cargo ship that goes to New York. And goes bang. We do the "3 eyes for an eye" thing. Hello??!! A loose cell of militant muslims attempted to kill 50,000 Americans on 9/11. Had they attacked 1-2 hours later, they would have likely succeeded in killing FAR MORE than 3,000. Can you imagine it?? 25,000 to 50,000 people DEAD.. all from one attack?? And there was no guarantee that Saddam wouldn't have built WMDs for those terrorists. After all, we found several prominent terrorist leaders in Baghdad, didn't we? Hawk

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (99919)	6/3/2003 12:15:44 AM
From: frankw1900	Respond to of 281500

The future benefits are entirely hypothetical. The present benefits are not hypothetical. Saddam Hussein is out of power. The US and Iraqis are starting to grind down the remnants of the Baath party. The Iraqis have more freedom than they ever had in their recent history. They can finally speak their minds without a government cutting their tongues out and don't have to pay the mordita. Electricity and other services soon will be far superior to what was there prior to the war. Things are improving in Iraq right now. It appears, cost benefits, so far, are in favour of Iraqis and US cost benefits, so far are far better than the more pessimistic pre-war scenarios. Afghanistan, today, is an even worse place to live in, than it was under the Taliban. Under the Taliban, Afghanis stayed away, now they are returning. It's unlikely they would return if the conditions are worse. I think US and its coalition partners could be doing a better job in Afghanistan but neither is the situation there as disastrous as under the Taliban. ...... Insofar as future developments are extensions of present processes reason for optimism about the futures of both countries is greater than pessimism.