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: Steve Lokness who wrote (70904)	6/5/2008 8:16:50 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542152

Given that Al Queda wasn't there until we opened the door for them, that they are weakened is hardly much of an accomplishment. The argument was that they had never been stronger. They where stronger in 2006. Arguably (largely) defeating them in Iraq, makes them weaker than if we had never gone in Iraq, but even if you reject that idea, largely defeating them in Iraq certainly does make them weaker than they used to be. Even if you start with the assumptions that 1 - We should not have invaded Iraq, and 2 - Our invasion opened the door for Al Qaeda, that only makes an argument against invading Iraq, which is water under the bridge now. It doesn't make much of an argument against either 1 - The idea that we should not quickly get out of Iraq or 2 - The idea that Al Qaeda is not presently at its all time peak of power and prestige.