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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (12344)	11/2/1998 3:06:00 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy kook, I would say we don't have the whole story of what took place at the end of the Gulf war. The known facts just don't add up. Sadam must have had some kind of leverage over us. Credible terrorism threat? A bomb? A secret friend? Something. Maybe, he still does.

To: one_less who wrote (12344)	11/2/1998 3:30:00 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I took Bush's explanation at face value. There was no world support to go into Bagdad and get Saddam. We put out a fire but didn't fireproof the house. It seemed to me like the most plausible ending to that conflict, although in hindsight we should have fireproofed the house.

To: one_less who wrote (12344)	11/2/1998 10:45:00 PM
From: pezz	Respond to of 67261

Brees, I believe Bush handled the entire gulf war as best as it could have been handled.Renember the TV pictures showing that road leaving kuwait city? You know the one with the 50,000 corpses? Well the Moslem world was not taking this to well.I also believe that the Iraqi Republican guard might have put up a spirited defense of their home land.Americans coming home in body bags for the sake of taking Bagdad would not have played well here at home especially with the Viet Nam war fresh in the minds of the American people. It is easy for us to ignore the political realities of the day but a president cannot do so. Suppose Bush had pushed on towards Bagdad.Suppose Sadam had used civilians as shields [not unlikely ]or suppose more pictures of brave Moslem solders dying to defend the mother land were flashed around the world.What could we expect from all this? Embassies in flames around the world? Credibility gained by Sadam? Lasting animosity for the US leading to who knows what,perhaps uniting of the Arab world against America? I believe Bush was wise in not taking these risks. No one can see the future .But a wise Statesman must look for realistic objectives and understand all possible risks. For sure the out come of Bushs' strategies may not have been perfect. But I believe it was the best that was available.I give him an A+ considering the difficult situation in the area. pez