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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (426788)	7/14/2003 5:39:13 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 769669

The two things they have in common is that they require American soldiers and American money. I'm not convinced of that yet. About what exactly are you not convinced? Yes, and he refuses to step down until American troops are in Liberia. Why? I am tired of tyrants playing games. I'm not sure that he specified American troops or specified a peacekeeping force. He specified American troops. He has asked specifically for US support. Frankly, staying until a peacekeeping force is in place is the only sane thing to do. If the government of Liberia folds and there is no peacekeeping force in place, it's a pretty good bet that anarchy takes over....it's anarachy by defintion. No government and no peacekeeping force, what else would it be other than anarchy? There are peacekeeping troops already in Liberia but he wants Americans added to the group for some reason.......he and Bush publicly have argued over than point. Hindsight is 20/20 but it looks like Saddam was simply telling the truth. He had no WMD. It seems so. It really screws things up when liars tell the truth. Doesn't it! the majority responded that they were opposed to more military interventions No specific intervention [country] in the question? Large majority or marginal? I don't remember....probably marginal....between 50-60%.