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: Bilow who wrote (191620)	7/13/2006 9:54:52 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You have no principles. The fact that you were willing to lie to the American public in order to get us into this war pretty much proves it. I didn't have to lie.. Whether there were ACTULLY WMDs in Iraq or not, was IRRELEVANT with regard to UNSC binding resolutions. Those resolutions were NOT designed to permit Saddam to maintain ambiguity about the accountability of all of Iraq's production/stockpiles of WMDs. If anything Saddam should have been toppled in 1991, as punishment for having invaded Kuwait. But the UNSC opted to cut a "deal" with him to preserve his regime so long as he dismantled his WMD capability and accounted FOR ALL OF EXISTING stockpiles and programs. But he was caught NUMEROUS TIMES attempting to circumvent his "probation" to the point where he just stopped cooperating and bet that the world wouldn't have the "grapes" to oust him as punishment. The fact that all the members of the UNSC voted unanimously to declare Saddam in "material breach" of obligations he agreed to under the cease-fire resolution was all that was required to justify military action against him. But even then, we permitted him a number of months to "fess up", but he still did not display the proper degree of cooperation and UNMOVIC had 176 pages of unresolved issues. Inspections are just what they are called.. Show your stuff and we'll inspect it for accountability and destruction. Investigations are where you have to go and find stuff that the bad guy is trying to hide. And that's NOT what the UNSC resolutions or cease-fire agreement was about. This would be a better argument if you had a way of enabling democratic reforms and accountable government to the Muslim world. The first step is to remove and purge the previous totalitarian power structure and establish a system wherein people can hold their government leaders accountable. The second step is to create the necessary security conditions, preferably internally generated by the elected government, to protect and preserve that democratic system and establish a rule of law that protects majority and minority rights. The third step is to nourish that fragile democratic system by providing what economic and advisory assistance and expertise they require so that they can have a viable and sustainable economy. But before you can ever establish a "new order", in this case democracy, you must destroy and neutralize adherents to the previous one. Or in the case of Iraq, fight off adherents to a different totalitarian ideology hoping to rise to power in the vacuum created by Saddam's overthrow. You're off on some weird tangent. On SI soon after 9/11, I am on record as having supported the overthrow of the Taliban, and as having said that we would be treated as heroes by the locals. Now we seem to have overstayed our welcome and our losses there are mounting. So. just overthrow them and go home, right? Nothing about creating a sustainable democratic system that will prevent the Taliban's re-emergence to power?? Isn't that destroying Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan and then just leaving them defenseless to the remaining adherents of the previous regime? This is NOT a football game where you score your points, win the game, and then hit the bar for a cold one and a slap on the back. This is a long-term struggle of creating democratic systems that can ward off the threats from fanatical Islamic militants who have imperialist designs of their own and aren't so easily dissuaded. A good principle for the US is to avoid land wars in Asia. Remember that one? Oh yeah, you're one of those koooooks that thinks we could have won in Vietnam. Japan is in Asia.. And we won that one.. Now go back to watching "The Princess Bride" and see if you can find anymore pithy comments.. Hawk