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 (131442)	5/5/2004 12:24:09 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Why oh why don't people recognize your brilliance? (The Pontificator has the same problem.) We must try to build a real coalition in Iraq, or find another strongman quickly, or be ready to partition the country. .... If I were in charge I would be moving forward ASAP on options two and three, and praying for option one So there's the solution - we should be looking for another strongman to take Saddam's place and also preparing to partition the country, and also praying for a "real coalition". It's so simple - why can't everyone see the brilliance in running in three different directions at once?

To: epicure who wrote (131442)	5/5/2004 12:28:14 AM
From: bela_ghoulashi	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I wish there was some satisfaction in being right, but alas, all people like me get is hostility aimed at them for being right. Not only was I right...but blah, blah, blah... You poor dear. How sad for you. Genius is never appreciated in its own time, and all that. And this board is just stuffed with unappreciated genius. You can't move an elbow without hitting one...

To: epicure who wrote (131442)	5/5/2004 8:45:09 AM
From: broadstbull	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

You know what? You were right about Iraq. I debated with you last year. I admit my proximity to ground zero, my rage about personal friends lost on 9/11, and fear led me to agree with the Neo-cons. So again, I'll admit, you were right.

To: epicure who wrote (131442)	5/5/2004 9:05:15 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I wish there was some satisfaction in being right, but alas, all people like me get is hostility aimed at them for being right. Well, Hans Blix didn't think you were right prior to the war: August 22, 2003 Blix convinces Shays Iraq's WMD are real An interesting story about a meeting between a US Congressman and Hans Blix. Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4, came away from a meeting with former chief weapons inspector Hans Blix convinced that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction, even while the location of Iraq's stockpile of chemical and biological weapons remains a mystery. "The bottom line is they could be anywhere," Shays said in a telephone interview from Geneva, Switzerland. Shays met privately with Blix in Stockholm, Sweden, earlier this week, then went to Geneva for a biological weapons convention. He plans to go to Iraq next week with a congressional delegation led by Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va. The two-hour meeting with Blix, who was executive chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, produced no dramatic revelations, Shays said. However, Shays said he now has a better understanding of the diplomatic maneuverings that eventually led to the demise of Saddam's regime. ..."The United States, in most every other instance, backed down. So he [Saddam] wasn't convinced the U.S. would act," Shays said. And some people think that appeasement works to our advantage! Amazing! Blix told Shays he thought Bush truly wanted Saddam to cooperate but was under pressure to act as quickly as he did for logistical reasons. The United States military had roughly 200,000 troops standing by in the region. ...Blix told Shays that if Bush had waited two more months, he believes France and Germany would have joined the United States in ousting Saddam. But Blix acknowledged that Bush believed otherwise. "He understands why waiting would have been a very difficult task, and he had no harsh words for the president," Shays said. And if we'd waited two more months it would have been a waste of many millions of US taxpayer dollars as well as two more months for Saddam's forces to dig in and get ready for us. What good would it have done to wait, if even Blix thought we'd be going in with France and Germany in a couple of months? Would France and Germany really bring that much to the table to make it worth the additional cost and risk? I don't thinks so. freespeech.com And why do I mention this? Because I was listening to CSPAN radio this morning where Christopher Shays was being interviewed. He said something that SHOULD BE a shock to folks like yourself.. He stated that Hans Blix told him that Tarik Aziz and Saddam were under the impression that Bush would not launch an invasion of Iraq.. And the reason they felt this way was because they had been assured that France, Germany, and Russia would oppose it.. That's downright subversion of the UNSC, X!!!... They provided Saddam with the false assurance that Bush was bluffing. And Saddam miscalculated accordingly.. You want to ask why US and coalition troops are currently in Iraq? Look at France, Germany, and Russia... And look at the tremendous payoffs they received in exchange for their "support" in the UNSC towards Iraq. If that doesn't make you down right furious, then I don't know what is.. Hawk