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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (124480)	2/8/2004 12:38:37 AM
From: Dennis O'Bell	Respond to of 281500

Do you think that the lives and wishes of the South Koreans might be influencing our decision making ? This certainly plays a role, but even more important is what China thinks of the situation, no ? The NK situation is a classic example of generations of people under such regimes sacrificed because of bad faith on the part of more powerful nations' desires. That these situations are allowed to exist and for as long as they do is why I laugh at the very notion of a "World Government" (which is really a euphemism for "anti-American World Government"). Of course, we could have done nothing in Iraq, and waited until Saddam too had gone shopping at AQ Khans Sam's Club for Nukes. Would that situation be better, do you think ? I don't think toppling the Baathist regime in Iraq was an optimal way of dealing with the terrorist problem or the problem of WMD proliferation among the various banana republic states who have no business having those things, but I don't really hold this against Bush the way so many left wing pundits do. The fact is that the US was largely "ready for the trip" given ambient post 9/11 sentiment so the Bush administration didn't have to do any major job of selling the idea of going into Iraq. Partisan politics being what it is, there has arisen a mythology that Bush somehow pushed the idea of invading Iraq through against widespread resistance on the part of the public, through a mesh of "lies" and "deceit". That is simply nonsense. While there were anti-war demonstrations orchestrated by Communist/Anti-Semite pressure groups like International ANSWER, their claims that there would be millions of dead Iraqis in the wake and other absurdities completely discredited any skepticism about the war. There was precious little in the way of critical thinking about what to do next.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (124480)	2/8/2004 10:49:11 AM
From: John Soileau	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<<Even without the WMDs, this brutal leader could destroy Seoul in a day. The city is within range of his artillery.>> Message 19781947 <<Of course, we could have done nothing in Iraq, and waited until Saddam too had gone shopping at AQ Khans Sam's Club for Nukes.>> The endless refrain, "we HAD to occupy Iraq right then, there were no other possible strategies to protect the US from terrorists" is divorced from reality. There were a myriad of other strategies to protect us, and they won't vanish with your handwave. As for the "Sam's Club for Nukes", Bush knew about it for years, but did little to nothing, did he? Oh yeah, too busy with the irrelevant, overflown regime next door. Which is worse, Saddam as your hypothetical future shopper, or Pakistan as the _known_ worldwide WMD purveyor to America's enemies? John

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (124480)	2/8/2004 10:55:41 AM
From: John Soileau	Respond to of 281500

By L K SHARMA DH News Service, WASHINGTON President George Bush, in a matching gesture, appears to have “pardoned” General Pervez Musharraf for Pakistan’s record of running a nuclear weapons supermarket! Washington will not reimpose sanctions against Pakistan and if Musharraf continues to rule, he may look forward to another Camp David invitation. The reporters who went to the State Department briefing on Thursday came out after listening to the usual praise of Musharraf. But for a change, the administration’s generosity was questioned by a number of incredulous reporters as the Pakistan issue dominated the briefing. Those who went to CIA Director George Tenet’s rare public lecture discovered that the CIA and British intelligence had penetrated the Pakistani proliferation network some years ago.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (124480)	2/8/2004 11:03:05 AM
From: John Soileau	Respond to of 281500

From the Cato Institute, a year ago: "March 5, 2003 Pakistan Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Cause for U.S. Concern President Bush should also pressure Musharraf to crack down on al-Qaeda in Pakistan WASHINGTON -- Although the United States has touted Pakistan as a "frontline ally" in the war on terrorism, the Pakistani government continues to support terrorist movements affiliated with al-Qaeda and has also played a significant role in advancing North Korea's nuclear program, according to a new Cato Institute report..." "U.S. policymakers need to be concerned about the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, the level of threat posed to that arsenal by al-Qaeda and related terrorist groups within Pakistan, the stability of Pakistan's regime, and the country's record on nuclear proliferation," writes Atal, adding that Pakistan, which has become the new command center for al-Qaeda, poses a greater threat to the U.S. than Iraq. As President Bush has been pressuring Iraq to disarm while mulling military action against Hussein's regime, Bush has ignored the presence of al-Qaeda operatives in Pakistan, where they fled and re-established themselves following U.S. action in Afghanistan, Atal argues." cato.org