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: marcos who wrote (103314)	6/28/2003 4:02:32 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Chrétien, for all his myriad faults for which we western canucks love to hate him, got this one right - the neocons did not make the case, Or was it that he would have just be unwilling to accept any rational for going to war because he has no spine? The wrong arguments have been made marcos. The binding UN resolutions which Saddam continued to defy were sufficient for terminating the cease fire and re-initiating hostile actions against the Baathist regime to create either compliance or regime change. But Chretien was not particularly keen on enforcing binding UN resolutions, now was he... If he had been, then maybe all of this would have been avoided. Kind of the same way with Cuba, where Castro has been able to cling to power for 41 years because he's able to derive sufficient support from other governments like Canada in order to sustain his political legitimacy by railing against perceived US imperialism. I know many of your Chretian supporters think you're doing the right thing. But one day maybe you'll realize that you've only exacerbated the problem by trying to coddle up with dictators who refuse to take actions to reform their governments and economies.... I still say that had the combined weight of the major international powers fallen upon despots like Saddam Hussein (and hopefully Castro), amazing things could have been accomplished that would have prevented the necessity for this war. What seems to be lacking in the UN, and governments like Canada is that idle threats will fall upon deaf ears. And a binding UN resolution that is not enforced is nothing more than an idle threat. Now let's see what happens in Iran, where it would seem the IAEA and UN are stepping up to the plate to forego the US taking unilateral action again against Tehran's nuke program. Hawk