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 (109568)	8/3/2003 3:11:23 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I notice that you didn't respond to your own quote: What do you mean I didn't respond.. There was nothing to respond to.. The context of my previous post related to leaving US troops in Kuwait CONTAINING Saddam Hussein in definitely while the UNSC sat on their arses until France and Russia believed they could quash any attempts to hold Saddam's regime accountable. That was a mission with no exit strategy.. At least in Iraq, there is an exit strategy, although with an open time frame... Stabilize the government of Iraq to the point where it can economically and politically govern itself, and then pull the majority of the US forces out... Or at a worst case scenario, we're required to take on Saudi Arabia... And believe me, if won't be hard to "motivate" American forces to go into that country to take on the Wahhabists, should the Saudis fail to do so themselves. It will be very easy for the Bush administration to refocus the American public's attention upon Saudi Arabia since we all pretty much suspect that members/agents of that government were directly involved in 9/11. And if Saudi Arabia fails to continue cracking down on its militant elements, it will damn near be impossible for there NOT to be an outcry over why we continue to refrain from cutting the head off the snake... Certainly the Democrats have a potential political card in claiming Bush has tried to protect the Saudis from public outrage... And that will only increase pressure upon Bush to confront the Saudis. But all of that requires Iraq to increase its oil production so that there is no disruption in the global economy when Saudi oil fields are temporarily offline (worst case scenario).. So let me ask you Bilow... If it's proven that there was Saudi complicity in 9/11, and they fail to make sufficient "amends" for it, should Bush overthrow the Saudis? And if so, will you be prepared to see even more American soldiers come home in body bags? Would such a battle be worth fighting in your eyes?? Contatinment is not a half-measure. Nor is it a "strategic band-aid", whatever the f' that means. The hell it's not, when we continue to see the UNSC permit Iraq to violate resolution after binding resolution.. You keep harping on this. Just as you keep ignoring it.. You don't have to like me Carl, or even agree with my opinions. But it's a FACT that a country cannot sustain 30% unemployment and 1/2 of its population under 18, without generating extreme societal tensions. And even more evident is, that militants of all types use, and rely upon, young idealistic children for indoctrination into their ideology/theology, so that have sufficient manpower to carry out their agenda... And that is the kind of "fodder" the Wahhabist cleric have available to them in Saudi Arabia.. So I don't give a S**T what your statistics say... I'm quoting to you a demographic shift that is NOT going to suddenly going to go away... As this young adults move out of their parents house and seek their own lives, they will be searching for something that gives their lives meaning.. And that isn't likely to be a career, nor a spouse and children (who they won't be able to afford).. So it will likely be religion.. and hatred for those they believe have oppressed them... Hawk