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 : FREE AMERICA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (825)	3/29/2006 1:58:16 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 14758

I perceive the liberation of Iraq as none of our business, end of story. I am implying that sometimes a tyrant holds a region together. And sometimes the tyrant is better than what comes after the tyrant. In this case, with the body count rising, I just hate to be right- but I am. It's not about what actually happens really- what I'm talking about are probabilities. When you looked at Iraq, before the invasion by the US, with Saddam in power, you and a somewhat stable system. Was he "evil"- sure. Were the people oppressed? Absolutely. Was the system semi-ok for the US? Yes, imo it was. Now, how do I rank these things? Well, I like to see the region stable because I like to see the world stable- mostly because then the US isn't spending so much money on policing the world. Do I care about Saddam being evil? Sure- but not enough to invade. There are lots of evil tyrants- I don't want to spend US money on removing them. Do I care that the Iraqi people were oppressed? Sure - but what worried me before the invasion, and what still worries me, was that the aftermath of whatever was done would be worse for the Iraqi people than what they had with Saddam. I think it's always important to think about things like that before you go "help" someone. The "terrorist bug zapper idea" assumes we have the moral right to turn a country into a bug zapper. I find that idea morally repellent, and much worse than just leaving their current leader in place. I do not think anywhere in Iraq is a much more peaceful place at the moment. There is no news coverage in many parts, because it is so violent- and no one can cover the news. Mosul is not cleaned out. But no news, due to an inability to get news, is not "good" news.