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: Don Hurst who wrote (128589)	4/7/2004 12:28:47 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Hmmm.....really good point...sure....but you have to help us here.....did we start either of those two? Did we start the war between Islamic Militants and the US? Or was it Bin Laden who declared war upon the US in 1996, and again in 2001? Again.. Iraq is a stepping stone towards combatting Islamic militancy. Saddam was a despotic regime, under binding UN sanctions, and increasingly desperate (as displayed by his ongoing WMD research discovered by David Kay). We had the legal basis for regime change in Iraq, given Saddam's ongoing non-compliance with his cease-fire committments. We had the moral basis, given his genocide against both the Shiites and Kurds. And we had the economic basis because it serves us, and the world, well to have an alternative source of oil from only nation that can rival Saudi Arabia as a producer, something which the continuing sanctions was denying to global economic growth. And we had the strategic basis because Iraq posed the best possibility of actually being restructured and turned around as an example of a successful muslim democracy (and I still believe this, despite the current turmoil). Hawk