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: bela_ghoulashi who wrote (121723)	12/17/2003 6:46:20 AM
From: Elsewhere	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 281500

The anti-war logic on this has never been clear. Why were claims of past support for Saddam an argument that we should not oppose him now? Were they contending that we were required to keep supporting Saddam because we had done so in the past, compounding the very sins they accuse us of? No, that's not the point. What I would like to see is some kind of apology or at least distancing from having employed Saddam as a useful pawn against the greater enemy of Iran, similar to what Mrs. Albright said about "serious mistakes" of 1970ies US foreign policy in South America. "When you speak of that era, I think many of us, as we look back on it, feel that there were many serious mistakes made," Albright said in a answer to questions after a speech on human rights to students at Emory University in Atlanta. cnn.com