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: greenspirit who wrote (134331)	5/25/2004 1:20:43 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 281500

Are you suggesting it is impossible to discuss the broader human right issues in Iraq, and the positive role we've played there in that regard, because of the prisoner abuse scandal? No, not at all.

To: greenspirit who wrote (134331)	5/31/2004 9:55:14 AM
From: BubbaFred	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"...positive role we've played there in that regard,..." What positive role? Abu Ghraib is positive role? Shutting down a newspaper to prevent freedom of speech is also a positive role? So what else have we done It's supposed to be by deeds and action, not mere words. So we are finding out what Saddam had to do to establish law and order for so many different factions, each wanting to be an independence entity. Instead that country is now in shambles with badly deteriorating infrastructure and little law and order. The general population is caught between two factions - the invaders and the freedom fighters. Besides, after everything we went through, do you think we should let them become truly independent and choose whatever path and policy they want to pursue, even if those policies do not match ours? Remember that our American forefathers revolted (became insurgents) against the British colonialists. Do you think our revolution was a general consensus by popular vote?