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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (4314)	8/5/2003 3:29:14 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793671

Now that's quite ambitious considering the severe opposition it would face from the left (globally) at every step in the process. Using Iraq as an indication of how it would play out, I doubt it can be achieved in that time frame. The left will see it as the final nail in their coffin if this is successfully achieved & will only step up the obstacles they throw at Bush, etc. JMO

To: LindyBill who wrote (4314)	8/5/2003 6:52:37 PM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793671

Left, Right and Middle will support 1 and 2 completely. Because you have left out a unilateral, military invasion and occupation. Ergo, you must be talking about coalitions, diplomacy, bilateral, trilateral, multilateral agreements, meetings, summits, agreements-not-to-invade. You guys don't get it yet. We were against all the stuff that has put us in this mess, not the objective of Removing Saddam or improving our National Security. Rascal @MaybeSomeDayTheDawn.com