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 (12366)	11/2/1998 4:53:00 PM
From: mrknowitall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

brees - The starving and dying in Iraq would not be starving and dying if Saddam and his ilk were living up to the terms of their surrender; oil would be flowing out and money, as well as desperately needed supplies, would be flowing in. Well, given Saddam's track record, I should amend that to oil flowing out and money flowing into Saddam's war machine. Desperately needed supplies would go only to those who support his regime. This is not the choice of the US. It is the choice of Saddam to not live up to the terms of the surrender. He chooses to continue to research and develop weapons of mass destruction. The UN maintains the economic sanctions. He is not personally affected by the sanctions so he continues to do what he does while his people starve and die. Your analogy confuses love of someone with Saddam loving his people and therefore makes no sense. The answer is to remove him from power. We didn't have the backing of the coalition to do that at the time, and with bozo in the White House we certainly aren't going to raise a consensus again, so now Saddam is free to do what he wants. He alone can do anything about it. He is thumbing his nose at the world and letting his people suffer. Mr. K.