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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quehubo who wrote (68088)	5/23/2008 9:05:26 PM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 542967

>>I suspect the military had options to get OBL over the years but did not want to expend the lives or enter Pakistan. << Quehebo - That may well be true. Granting that, I think you might consider being more charitable in your assessment of Bill Clinton and his efforts in that regard. He was dealing with real-world constraints, too. >>Knowing what the world would look like now without entering Iraq is hard to know. We could easily have Iran and Iraq in an nuclear arms race. How the hell did Pakistan get nukes?<< Yes, it's hard to know what the world would look like now if we hadn't gone into Iraq. We do know enough to be pretty certain that Iraq, which had nothing even resembling a functioning nuclear program, and was under serious international scrutiny and sanctions, would be pretty unlikely to have started up a program between then and now. Not unless those sanctions had been completely lifted. And I think it would have been very difficult to drum up majority support for lifting them. As far as "empowering" Saddam Hussein, I'd say that the US stopped doing that in 1991. We hadn't actively empowered him since the 80s. - Allen