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: Hawkmoon who wrote (112544)	8/24/2003 11:08:14 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi Hawkmoon; Re: "No.. I blame Reagan for choosing sides, namely the Phalangist Maronites... Once we chose sides, US forces became legitimate targets for Shiites and Druze." By your own logic you must blame Bush for choosing sides in Iraq, namely the expatriates. And once he chose sides, US forces became legitimate targets for Shiites and Baathists. Re: "Your attitude seems to indicate that we should permit a complete power vacuum to develop within Iraq, leaving 23 million Iraqs doomed to wage civil war against one another, torn apart by the various neighboring regimes who don't one faction or another from seizing control (or competing in the global oil market)." All these things are going to happen no matter what we do. Sometimes there are things that you break that you can't put back together again. Sometimes there are things that you break that no one but God can put together again. Iraq is a broken thing. We broke it. We cannot put it back together again. It's arguable that the Arabs might have a chance, as you yourself admit. My difference with you on this is that you live in a fantasy world and believe that we can get the Arabs to help us without giving up our control of the situation. I believe that there is no way in Hell that the Arabs are going to pull our nuts out of the fire until we give up attempting to control the Arab country of Iraq. And even then it's possible that the rest of the Arab world won't get involved, but that's our best chance. Re: "I don't buy this.. But it requires us to remain neutral, seeking only to reconstruct Iraq and leave control to a legitimate Iraqi government." We're hunting down Baathists as fast as we can, LOL. That's hardly "neutral". This gets back to the fantasy that the neocons only want democracy in Iraq. The truth is that the neocons want democracy in Iraq only if the majority party supports the neocon's agenda in the Middle East. That's not "neutral". Re: "... but I'm not prepared to let a few terrorists defeat our national will." What do you mean by this? Are you going to go over to Iraq and hunt down terrorists yourself? Or are you just saying that you're not a Boy Scout, and consequently are not always prepared? -- Carl