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: GST who wrote (105383)	7/14/2003 10:07:44 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

why invade a country like Iraq which has NO NUKE program while leaving North Korea to finish its business? The cost of invading Iraq, in money and lives, was judged to be acceptable; the cost of invading N. Korea was judged otherwise. It's ridiculous to blame Clinton, or anyone else, for not stopping the North Koreans. The means to stop them existed, but the price was, and is, higher than anything Americans are willing to pay.

To: GST who wrote (105383)	7/14/2003 10:10:35 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

One answer to your question is that NK has nukes and a border with China, which also has nukes. Also, I'm of the opinion Iraq would have an active nuclear program as soon as sanctions eroded away. So what do want us to do about NK?