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: Bilow who wrote (114026)	9/6/2003 6:35:11 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

By contrast the Iraq war, by Bush's own admission, was a "preemptive" war. Iraq had not attacked us. Just like we hadn't attacked Japan when they attacked us back in 1941. So we should have attacked Saudi Arabia instead? Do you think it was legal to invade Vichy N. Africa as a means to "get at" the Nazi Afrika Korps? After all, that was a sovereign state, distasteful as it's existence might have been. I see a direct corollation between the two examples. We could legitimately overthrow Saddam because he had not complied with UNSC binding resolutions. After all, we were spending $3 Billion per year containing him, with no positive return for the effort, and considerable "event risk" associated with it. But post 9/11, when we discovered the Saudi connections (officially sanctioned or not), Iraq provides a nice "stepping stone" toward applying direct pressure upon the Saudis. The turmoil in Iraq will not last forever. There will always be some level of resentment towards foreign troops in the country, but when faced with the reality of foreign threats from Al-Qaeda, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Baathist Syria, (all with reason to fear a democratic state next to their totalitarian regimes), we'll see acceptance by Iraqis for maintaining a US presence. Acceptance by US forces to being stationed there is another question... (b) these conflicts were thrust upon us. We did not decide to attack Japan or Germany, they attacked or declared war on us. And 9/11 wasn't? Al-Qaeda declared war upon us. The heart of militant Islam lies within Saudi Arabia. Do we not need to contain that militantism, and if necessary, directly attack it (or its leadership)? Hawk