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 (111121)	8/12/2003 3:42:54 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 281500

No, they would have preferred an internal coup, actually.....

To: GST who wrote (111121)	8/12/2003 3:53:03 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

re you saying that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others around Bush were not looking to invade Iraq prior to 9/11? No, I don't think so. They were searching for some way to end the standoff, but would have preferred an internal coup. An invasion would not have been practically possible unless Saddam gave a clear provocation. It was a quandary for them, as they believed that Saddam represented a clear destabilizing threat, both in his continued defiance, the costs to America in money and goodwill (America was essentially footing all the bill for keeping Saddam in his box, while other nations freeloaded and broke the sanctions), and in his efforts to nurture terrorists and graduate his own.

To: GST who wrote (111121)	8/12/2003 4:25:38 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

GST: Look at it this way, 9-11 caused a geo-political shift. The path we were on was shifted, from internal workings of the faltering economy to raising of eyes and finding new path-to elimination of terrorism First the real baddie, OBL and crew. Situation covered Who is next ? Iran, N Korea, Iraq, Syria.? Pick which one .We were not doing this to save humanity or or help suffering people,It was to prevent attacks on the US and to stop countries from supporting terrorists, which includes supplying WND's We lacked intelligence on all those countries except one- Iraq. Iraq had barrels of WMD's, they had been trying to make an H-bomb they had the enriched uranium , they were trying to get long-range missiles, and above all we had proof because the UN Inspectors had discussed those things in their reports. What we could not have known in 2003, was what he did with all that stuff , but we are well on the way of finding out and preparing a report Saddam lied cheated and stole. Paid no heed to the 14 UN Resolutions which he was required to implement to prevent breaking the truce existing from the Gulf War. A really bad guy in the eyes of the UN with no excuse for violating the rules. .Give me his excuse - if he did not have WMD's, why did he not tell the Inspectors what he did with them .? Some argue it would make him look weak in his neighbors eyes- I wont buy that excuse He had armaments everywhere in that counrtry, schools, libraries, hotels, buried, even had buried fighters. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong reputation and the wrong attitude Target zero. Sig