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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tsigprofit who wrote (3610)	9/16/2003 1:58:56 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

I agree with you 100% and that is scary as I'm sure many here perceive that I am some sort of right winger. My only step forward from your post would be to suggest that Saddam deserved to be deposed, not because of WMD or links to Al Queda, but because of what he had done and would no doubt do to his people and/or neighbors in the future. It was clear that the people of Iraq would never have the strength to depose him and the costs of enforcing embargoes and "no fly" zones would increase exponentially and become less effective over time. We made a grave mistake in not supporting the Shia post-1992 after encouraging them to rebel. I do believe that the US has the power to be proactive in the future in the war against terror, which may or may not include Al Queda and include deposing those who terrorize their own people. I do believe we made a grave mistake in not waiting a year and seeing how far we could go to get international approval. I have a hunch that the French would never have gone along with it so one year later, we likely would have had to go forward. The nearness of the election and the risk of a catastrophe was probably the reason for the rush to start the war before the peak of the summer heat and sandstorm season. I believe the US had good intentions and that our "leaders" really believe that they have done good to rid the world of one of its worst tyrants. Yet, we have been abysmal in our PR and our approach, going back to our ties with Saddam and in our insistence on doing it "our way" "on our time table" or else. I believe that the vast majority of Americans would support what I just posted. I believe the vast majority of Americans were disheartened to see the suffering of the Liberians, begging for US troops to rush over. A relatively small number of troops could have been sent months earlier and the fighting would have stopped. The troops should have been pulled from Germany where they are no longer needed or wanted by anyone. I would also be critical of other nations who stood by and did nothing, but the US does have a historical tie to Liberia and the call was for the US troops. Delay meant death.