SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Hawkmoon who wrote (112363)8/22/2003 7:33:09 PM
From: Ish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
<<To scare off the UN from increasing its activities and undermining the credibility of the insurgency against Coalition forces.>>

This one may have backfired. I heard a list of countries that will become involved and it's close to 30 and growing.



To: Hawkmoon who wrote (112363)8/23/2003 2:42:37 AM
From: greenspirit  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Hawk, since the U.N. refused protection from American troops it was an easy target.

The U.N. official who refused to allow U.S. troops to protect the facility is culpable. I wonder who that person is? I wonder if it was the Secretary General himself?

Questions I haven't seen asked in the media.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News