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: Bilow who wrote (100652)	6/8/2003 2:15:31 AM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

< If they knew that Iraq was not a threat, then why would Bush want a war that would destroy his popularity?> It hasn't destroyed Bush's popularity. Just as Clinton's felony lie didn't destroy his popularity, either. And Reagan weathered Iran-Contra with no serious damage. That's what I mean, when I say that, in the current political climate, there is no down-side to lying. You ask, why did we conquer Iraq? For the same reason the French built a fort at Quebec: to project power up the St. Lawrence, and into the interior of N. America. Why did the British take Capetown? To project power into S. Africa. And, today, we take and hold Iraq, for no better reason: to project power through the Middle East. It was the easiest target, a well-positioned base from which to bully the neighborhood. As is clearly explained, in the AEI position papers. It's the ageless imperial impulse.