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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (140528)	7/15/2004 8:34:42 PM
From: dumbmoney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

At some point it becomes useless to ask if he's certifiably crazy or not; he was paranoid, delusional regarding his actual strength, aggressive, and prone to wild miscalculations. Did he also think that God wanted him to be President?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (140528)	7/15/2004 8:46:20 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

URL please? And if it were useless to call him crazy, people in the West would quit doing it- they do it because they think it proves a point. Not only do I not think it proves a point, I don't think he was.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (140528)	7/15/2004 8:52:30 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, suppose I agree with you on everything you have to say about Saddam as it relates to his character, how do you make the case that waging this war was the best course of action and that other solutions would not have been better? You'd have to make the case for three things: 1. Capability: Intent alone is not enough; you have to show that Saddam had the capacity to do great damage and that there was no other way to prevent his access beyond this war. 2. Urgency: You have to show that this was an urgent matter that could not be delayed even for a few months to allow the inspectors finish their job or to plan for some kind of assassination/revolution over the next few years. 3. Cost/benefits: You have to show that the most likely damage (not a hypothetical worst case) that Saddam could have done was far worse than the most likely damage of this war (for example the increase in terrorist recruits for at least a generation).