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: Sam who wrote (106033)	7/17/2003 8:13:22 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

More important than actually getting rid of him immediately was rendering him impotent. My guess is that there were better ways of doing that than the one chosen. If you think the purpose of this war was only to render Saddam impotent (leaving aside the question of how we were supposed to stop all his extracurricular activities while he retained control of a police state), then most of your conclusions make sense. But the war wasn't just about Saddam; those were only the public reasons. The real reason was starting an urban renewal project in the Mideast, & sending the message that America was not a paper tiger after all, and the rest of the region had better stop oppressing their populations while inciting them against America, or they would really have some problems they could blame on America! Since stating these real reasons out loud would have dramatically diminished their chances of success, they were not publicized. WMDs (universally agreed to exist) were chosen as the casus belli. Ironic that Saddam has struck his hardest blow against GW Bush, not in war, but in embarrassment.