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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (26534)	8/27/2003 10:13:12 AM
From: Knighty Tin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

ss, the problem is, going into debt to fight a war, even a basically unopposed war like this one, was good politics. The knuckle draggers are all saying "we were attacked." True. The fact that we weren't attacked by the people we fought in the war doesn't seem to be important. But, ballooning the huge Bush deficit to make Iraq liveable is not popular at home. We have taken away the Iraqi's ability to make things better, but won't do what is necessary to make things better ourselves. Net, net: small nations' resistance to American hegemony will increase.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (26534)	8/27/2003 2:50:02 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

Scott, Have you considered that Bush/Cheney may not share your goals for Iraq? Perhaps they want to increase the terrorist threat. This is excellent for blackmailing Congress into larger and larger military budgets. And perhaps the rapid transformation of the Iraqi economy into a basket case with a few companies being "privatized" and taken over by U.S. corporate management with the U.S. taxpayer subsidizing the operation is really at the heart of the goals for the Bushies.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (26534)	8/27/2003 5:10:47 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 89467

To think I'm going to be swayed by an ex-Clinton supporter/employee & by Bilow (a known liar, trouble maker, extremist, ET AL), then you've figured wrong. I'll stick to facts & reality thank you. And as time & events unfold in the real world, I'll continue to shape my POV.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (26534)	8/27/2003 5:28:14 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 89467

THE BOTTOM LINE IS BUSH HAS NOT MANAGED THE IRAQI ADVENTURE WELL...We should not have rushed in when we did (we now know there wasn't an 'imminent threat') -- we needed much broader support from the allies. We should have done MUCH MORE post war planning but we didn't. Bush should fire some of the stubborn folks who've made critical mistakes (like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz) and humbly go to the U.N. and give up some control in Iraq in exchange for some additional support...WE ARE IN A QUAGMIRE RIGHT NOW IN IRAQ AND IT'S NOT FUNNY -- SOLDIERS ARE GETTING KILLED EVERY WEEK...I'm not impressed with Bush's leadership...One of my best friends is a Ranger still over in Iraq and he lost one of his best friends from Westpoint in the last week over there. His return date (to come back to the states and see his wife and child) has been pushed back 3 different times by our Defense Department...He's commanding over 150 of our troops near Baghdad in 130 degree weather and its rough over there. I support our troops 100% BUT I sure don't support the leadership they are getting right now...I don't think our country is any safer after going into Iraq and spending tens of billions of our tax dollars...We've actually created a breeding ground for terrorism...Many of us around the country are hungry for new leadership...Keep an open mind. It may be time to draft a General...;-) Well said!