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: Elsewhere who wrote (111084)	8/12/2003 9:43:27 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

My statement stands. No where is there a call to invade Iraq. I'm surprised the only way you view removing someone from power is through military invasion. Haven't the critics here been telling us for months there were dozens and dozens of different ways to accomplish our goals short of invasion? Using that line of reasoning, 360 members of congress also called for an invasion. Oh, and by the way, posting CFR conspiracy theories from the objective N.Y. Times doesn't do anything to bolster your case.

To: Elsewhere who wrote (111084)	8/12/2003 12:14:46 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

Remember Phase One? motherjones.com <<...with Liberia now on the Pentagon's list of headaches, and $1 billion spent per week on operations in Iraq, what are the chances that the administration will devote the necessary time and energy to a phase of the war on terror that many say should have preceded -- not coincided with -- the war in Iraq?...>>

To: Elsewhere who wrote (111084)	8/12/2003 12:38:07 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Jochen, you have cited the group of people who wanted to invade Iraq in 1998. As we know from Pollack's book, an invasion was seriously debated in the Clinton White House at this time as well. But they were a minority voice, and nobody listening to Bush pre 9/11 would have suspected that they would become the majority voice in his administration. Bush 41's administration was policy-led by the Realists from State, and the expectation was that Bush 43 would be also.