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: Lou Weed who wrote (124751)	2/16/2004 5:20:11 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If we were so concerned about the plight of the Iraqi people why didn't we do something in the eighties when we knew he was gassing his own people?!?!?! Simple... Because we were more concerned about the Iranians militant theocrats. We played both regimes off against one another.. Or have you forgotten the "arms for hostages" debacle, where the US provided actual TOW missiles and other assorted spare parts to Iran (to use against Iraq), in exchange for assisting in releasing our hostages in Lebanon?? I don't actually recall the US selling any weapons to Iraq. We gave them intelligence. Hawk@theprince.gov

To: Lou Weed who wrote (124751)	2/16/2004 6:19:16 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Michael, I did not state that the US ranks the plight of the Iraqi people as its top foreign policy priority. Obviously not. In the 80's, containing Khomenei's Iran was more important. (A highly multilateral policy I might add, as all our allies in the Gulf heartily approved.) What I did say was that the US has as of THIS MOMENT staked out a foreign policy position where it DOES care about the plight of the Iraqi people. To a very large extent, their success is ours from here on out. France and Russia, on the other hand, staked out an opposing position, where Saddam's success was their success. On the whole, I would say that US fp cares something for the plight of oppressed peoples, though usually not enough to act against our own interests, or without other motives. We do have humanitarian interventions to our credit. Our interventions in Somalia and Kosovo were purely humanitarian. Is there any other power you can even say that much of? When was France's last humanitarian mission? Your problem is that you would rather have no good thing done, than have it done with impure motives.