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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bela_ghoulashi who wrote (44677)	5/15/2004 11:05:08 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 793914

This guy misses some major points. If one of the most significant objectives of the Iraqi conflict was pour encourager les autres, then it has been a resounding success. Hardly. Governments have bowed before us, yes. Many of those they govern, though, loathe us more than ever before, and are not at all happy to see their governments doing the kowtow. And who's on the sidelines, ready to present an alternative to those governments? AQ, of course. Submissive governments and radicalized populations are a perfect combination for AQ. They don't need support from governments, either, though they will take it if they can get it. They can shelter just as well, sometimes better, in countries with dysfunctional governments. No shortage of those around. That alone means there is no alternative for America and Britain but to stay in Iraq until that country is stable and safe for democracy What happens when the Iraqis ask us to leave before we think that point has been reached? What happens when decisions made by a democratically elected Iraqi government don't suit the interests of the US? The heroic stiff-upper-lip bloat is getting really depressing. This guy sounds like he's about to start quoting Kipling. That ain't gonna cut it in this millenium.

To: bela_ghoulashi who wrote (44677)	5/16/2004 12:42:14 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793914

If, indeed, whoever is in charge in Iraq after June 30 asks us to go -- how could we stay? Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people. It's their country. That's number one. We were lied to about WMD. That's number two. I don't blame Bush but it happened on his watch. The people who lied to us are allegedly on our side. That's number three. Again, I don't blame Bush, but if I were he, I wouldn't have the stomach for acting as agent for whoever's agenda we're advancing. If we pull out then, it's probably true that the country won't be united but in fairness to the Kurds, I hope they get their own country. I would feel nothing but shame if we helped subjugate them to the Shi'a or the residual Ba'athists. It's a clusterfcuk, but staying past our time won't change that. If they ask us to stay, that's another matter, I vote for staying as long as we're welcome.