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: KLP who wrote (219268)	2/18/2007 11:40:16 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

KLP, re: "This is why I brought up Bosnia...and you ignored the question. In my mind, going to war is one and the same thing. If we went to war in Bosnia for less than good reasons and everyone in the world making the judgement, and ditto with Iraq.... then what's the point helping anyone. ????" Why is it that we can pick up garden snakes with our bare hands but not rattlesnakes? They're both snakes, aren't they? Why is it that we could intervene in Bosnia and not lose a single soldier, not lose the trust of the world, not enrage an entire culture and religion and not spend hundreds of trillions of dollars....while our intervention in Iraq has cost the lives of thousands of soldiers, enraged an entire culture and religion and required the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars....and all the while the situation is getting worse and worse? The answer is simple, it's not a black and white world; it's a many shades of gray world and one size doesn't fit all. That's why sound judgement in leadership is so critical. In Bosnia the American leadership made the decision that intervening in a situation that was considered intolerable was morally justified, cost/benefit justified and, most importantly, doable. So far their judgement has been proven generally correct. In Iraq the American leadership made the decision that intervention was morally justified, cost/benefit justified and doable. So far they've been proven to have been horribly, tragically wrong. "And with Iraq....what do you think will happen with the oil fields when we leave? Do you think the Iraqi's can hold them? And if not, do you think the terrorists will buy nukes, and other things? If they do, what will they do with them? Should we stand by and let that happen? The oil fields aren't producing as much oil as they did when Saddam ran the country. If we leave and cease supporting the population with the billions of dollars that are being grafted out of our treasury, they will have to live off the production of those oil fields. The oil will go into the world market where all world production impacts the price of oil, no matter who the initial buyer is. As far as "terrorists" buying nukes with the oil money, I think you misunderstand the term "terrorists." If Iraqi oil fields are controlled by today's insurgents then they will have to come out of the shadows and they'll no longer be terrorists; they'll have become the leadership of a new sovereign Iraq. The new "terrorists" will be those using guerilla tactics to take THEM down. And they'll be safer from our point of view because they'll have much to lose and nothing to gain by "nuking" us offensively. Once in the open they are targetable and subject to sudden and efficient retaliation at any time. In spite of the propaganda that we get from Bush/Cheney, men smart enough to take power are rarely insane, out of control, suicidal idiots. Saddam wasn't, Ghadaffi wasn't, even Edie Amin wasn't, the Iranian president isn't and these new leaders won't be. Sure, they'll work like dogs, lie, cheat and steal to get nukes, but not for offense. They'll want them for the same reason that we've always said we wanted them, mutual deterrence. Should we stand by and let them get them? No, we should work hard to get a disarmament treaty worldwide. But to do that with any hope of stopping proliferation would require that we relinquish our death hold on nuclear weapons ourselves and the "I'm too scared of my shadow" crowd would never allow that to happen here. Now, I've indulged you with my thoughts in direct response to your questions. How about reciprocating with a rebuttal for my earlier assertion to you that: "You can prop up any government of any sect you want in Iraq and the end result will be an antiAmerican, antiIsrael, radical, intolerant and oppressive regime that will be the nightmare of Americans." Because if I'm right, then why are our soldiers dying over there?