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 (139289)	7/8/2004 11:11:53 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I happen to think Saddam and his secular state might have been a good thing. Wow. Don't tell the Kurds. Or the folks who had their daughters raped, children killed, tongues cut off, etc. The folks in the mass graves can't hear you. I doubt they'd agree with you if they could. The man was unspeakably evil. I really don't see how you can justify saying that his secular govenment was a Good Thing. I agree that it is too early to tell what the ultimate resolution of the war on Iraq will be. We are certain, however, of two things, namely, that Saddam won't be running the country and that we will have a lot of influence on what Iraq does as an independent country. It won't be threatening Saudi Arabia, that I can guarantee you. For that reason alone, I think getting rid of him was worth the effort. You aren't allowed to get rid of governments just because they worry you. Oh, come on, cut out the cheap rhetoric, save it for the suckers. That kind of phrasing doesn't advance the discussion one bit. It's not "worry" we're talking about but dangers and risks.