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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (10367)	5/10/2004 12:20:19 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Hmmmm - you may be right, but I personally think they would have suffered a lot longer under Saddam. One way or another, the US will be outta there. The writing is on the wall. It will be up to the Iraqis to either forge a common nation or to split up among 3 nations, that will likely be involved in some type of war over the oil wealth. The US time there is finite. Saddam would have stayed until his death and the divisions and crises would only have boiled over continually and gotten worse. I do see the arguments and have to agree with those who blast the lack of planning, the lack of follow through and the mis-direction of resources in the war on terror. But your blanket statements are no more accurate than (and are actually quite similar in scope to) those of the extreme right wing who see an evil hand everywhere.