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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JDN who wrote (471905)	10/7/2003 6:02:12 AM
From: zonder	Respond to of 769670

I cannot comment on Prospect magazine as I have never heard of them and thus am unfamiliar with their ability to judge what is the best course of action to take. Hm. I have to say I don't know of ANY magazine that is able to judge the best course of action. It is the authors of the articles who may or may not be in a better position to judge than us, our leaders, or their "advisors". This particular guys is: "Edward Luttwak is a senior fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC." Prospect magazine is published in the UK. I heartily recommend it, as it includes views from different angles, and publishes well researched articles from specialists. However, it has never been my experience to learn that ignoring a problem will cause it to go away. Who said "Let's ignore Iraq until it goes away" :-) This is what the article says: Coalition forces should not abandon Iraq, but they should withdraw to remote desert garrisons and let Iraqis try to govern themselves. There is an alternative. Now that the Iraqi governing council is in place, our officials can be recalled, and reduced US and British garrisons can be moved to desert bases, with everyday security left to the police and the Kurdish and Shi'i militias. That way, any Ba'athist resurrection or foreign intrusion could still be prevented, reconstruction will become an Iraqi responsibility funded with Iraqi revenues, and Iraqis alone will design their government. As for your last statement of "allowing the people of Iraq to continue to be subjugated by terrorists", I have to admit I didn't understand your point at all. Are you under the impression that before US troops graced them with their presence, Iraqis were "subjugated by terrorists"? Or are you calling the Iraqi Governing Council "terrorists"? just ISNT THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH WAY I understand your good intentions. In return, try to understand that outsiders, especially people of the Middle East, who had a first-hand taste of the "British Way" during its colonial era, might have a slightly different perception of these intentions. In this light, it is difficult for me to understand what exactly you are opposing in the proposition that the US/UK occupation forces should give more governing authority to the Iraqi Governing Council and withdraw to rural areas.