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: broadstbull who wrote (132226)	5/8/2004 1:17:32 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I agree with Jochen who says Odom is right. It was the way we were trying to go in Iraq.From day one, and months before the invasion.. To get the UN involved, and that is still in the cards with a new Resolution now being written Forming a Democracy in Iraq was never in our plans, else how can people argue that we had no post-invasion plans? But they obviously would need a new government and we try to influence them by discussing the advantages of a Democracy. And by nixing those forms that would create new problems and instability. The major arguments stem from having found no MWD's, yet we cannot appreciate the many 10's of thousands of casualties on both sides who were saved by not being subjected to those. We also cannot know all that GWB has in mind for the Iraqi situation if he is re-elected. Our Administrations declarations of intent are firmly presented for several very good reasons, including morale and support by Congress. If situations become critical thay can be changed. It will not be done by the whim of every voter, but by the people we have elected to power. But we know that that Iraq needs a stabilized and predictable government to prevent disruption of their oil supplies. The over-extention of our Military in Iraq could be an advantage in the long war on terrorists. A warning that our military should be improved and funded. A horrible thought to peaceniks who have some hidden plans to negotiate with terrorists while they are building and delivering bombs to Turkey, Saudi Aarbi, Spain,etc. Can Bush apologize? Well, he just did about the prisons. Should Bush apologize for believing all that the intelligence agencies and the UN inspectors told him about WMDS?. What would be say? "I'm sorry, they all lied to me-I should have gone over there and asked Saddam himself" He did not do that because Saddam himself had already proved to the UN he was one of the best liars in existence. Sig