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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (313191)	11/30/2006 10:07:13 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572560

re: When the invasion started, there were those on this board who questioned whether or not that the Baathists and the Sunni's would go gently into the night or rage, rage against the darkness(sorry about that). So if at least some of us could see this coming, why couldn't they? Funny, I was reading an article about the 1st Iraq war and how the Bush 1 people didn't want to take Baghdad because they figured there would be a civil war. If Papa saw that 15 years ago how come junior could see it? re: Any way, the mission likely was doomed from the start. I think if we had retreated to Kuwait right after we took Baghdad and left the military and police essentially intact, and said to them "OK guys, it's your country, you guys put someone in power that is going to be fair to all the people else we're coming back in and do the same thing again..." we might have had a decent result with decent future relations. Our military would have maintained, in fact enhanced, it's respect. (Now they look impotent). They probably would have been mostly home a couple of years ago and Iraq would have been incrementally improved politically and a lot improved economically. Of course then we couldn't have looked for Saddam or WMDs. But the best thing to have done is nothing... no invasion.