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: Don Hurst who wrote (171208)	9/23/2005 5:01:22 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

Don, I'm not suggesting that because the waiting game wouldn't have displaced Saddam and sons, that the USA should have invaded. If I'd been in charge, I'd have just sat tight in regard to Iraq and left them to it, while trying to get the reconstituted NUN in business to handle such situations. There didn't seem to be any particular urgency to do something as it seemed obvious to me that Saddam didn't have much going in the WMD department. There was enough going on in Afghanistan to keep the USA busy. Finding Osama for example would have been a good thing to do. But the example the USA made of Saddam's regime must have been observed by others such as Libya, North Korea, China [in regard to Taiwan], Iran, Syria. Sure, there is a messy aftermath, but it must have been edifying for dictators around the world to see the outcome for Uday and Qusay and the rest of the deck of cards and to see Saddam hauled out of his spider hole. Ooops, meanwhile, CNN showing levees failing in New Orleans and the hurricane is still not even there. Mqurice