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: GST who wrote (149509)	10/28/2004 8:52:26 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

GST, Stop playing with the news. Saddam was a one-man horror show. He deserved to be removed. This outcome we have now was not pre-ordained. Better management within iraq, more troops on the ground, and dare i say better diplomacy would certainly have had a better chance for success and then it would have been worth while to secure american interests in the middle east while bringing a better govt into iraq. Howver we screwed up so you are right. If i had a choice between this outcome and striking a deal pre-war and post-9/11 with saddam, i would choose the latter. But what i am saying is that choice wasnt an inevitablity. Its a product of bungling and more bungling. Invading iraq didnt have to be the giant step backwards you allude to, although it seems to have become that. And if thats where we are now, we have to think long and hard before we commit to this for the long haul. The saying "cut your losses" comes to mind, doesnt it? Mike