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: epicure who wrote (130832)	5/1/2004 10:39:10 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I suggest you take a look at the way we deal with our friend China, to see some of the ways one can work to halt human rights abuses, without resorting to war. That's all well and good... But China's a net consumer of oil.. not a net exporter of it.. Thus, it has economic reasons, driven by demographics, to create pluralistic change.. But it also took the brutality of Tiananmen square, and the subsequent international outrage, for that government to initiate the changes necessary.. Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Iran are net exporters of oil. And it's little surprise that democractic reforms have not taken place in those nations until recent years, as the demograhic surge of their baby boom has finally caught up with their economic stagnation.. After why share it with the people? All they have to do is use the time tested "plomo o plata" tactic and they essentially assure "loyalty" to the regime.. Don't oppose us and we'll give you enough to scrape out a measly living.. Join us and you will profit.. But oppose us, and you will be eliminated from the gene pool.. And that continued oil wealth prevents the kind of changes you see in China. They don't need to change so long as they have that source of funds, devoid of a diversified economy.. But now we're facing serious challenges.. We can't permit the status quo to continue in the region.. Because there are young minds being influenced by Islamist militancy.. And the bottom line is that if had not overthrown Saddam, eventually the Islamists would have. And then they would be in control over all of that oil... And they would use those funds to advance their Islamist agenda... Bottom line... sometimes the greatest human rights violation is not intervening by force.. And it certainly is when we fail to do so when our own national interests are directly threatened... So while human rights may have not been the reason we overthrew Saddam, it darn well be a major part of the how and why related to rebuilding the country.. I guess, for me, my threshold of tolerance vis-a-vis Iraq is just a bit lower than your own.. Hawk