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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (107680)	8/25/2005 3:26:18 AM
From: Kid Rock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

are you just too chicken to argue how dare you use chickens in such a negative light! ;)

To: Grainne who wrote (107680)	8/25/2005 8:19:11 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

You have banned most of those you now summon. Unban them if you want a response.

To: Grainne who wrote (107680)	8/25/2005 6:50:50 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 108807

I disagree with Bill on the timing of when we should leave. I agree about his no permanent occupation point though. Our involvement in Iraq for some time now has been mandated by the UN - UNSC resolution 1546. 1546 lays out the political process taking place now. It also says the MNF (and we are 90% of the MNF) mandate will not end till after the constitutional elections planned for the end of this year take place. This UNSC vote on 1546 was unaminous - which means since we are a permanent member of the Security Council, we voted for the it (in fact, we helped draft it.) So I don't see that we can honorably leave till our responsibility under the mandate expires - which means early next year. After that, we can leave. And I think we should though the exit should be orderly and coordinated with the new Iraqi gov't. How long it takes to exit is a matter for military planners to work out - I could see a phase down over a year or so as being reasonable.