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 (12409)	11/2/1998 9:51:00 PM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>>>I asked you several times how many more innocent villagers should >>>die before this military strategy should cease. Even though you've >>>admitted that Saddam and his security forces are not effected and >>>there could be no other victims of this strategy (which is ours) >>>you refuse to allow the US to take any responsibility for the >>>resulting predictable deaths of countless innocent villagers; or >>>even to suggest that we should stop. I was not arguing whether to continue or discontinue this diplomatic policy of embargoing military and other supplies. I was arguing that the primary responsibility for the deprivation of the Iraqi people lie with the Iraqi leadership. They are the ones who refuse to cooperate with the terms of the surrender and who when circumventing the embargo funnel the supplies for their own private use. Using your argument, the U.S. should be blamed as the killers of the Bosnians, Congo, Rwanda, and so on. >>>Let me try one more time. What benefit is anyone getting from >>>continuing this death march? As others on this thread have >>>suggested, Saddam is a zillion times more likely to facilitate >>>terrorism within our borders than launch a weapon that has to >>>travel half way around the world to reach US borders. You forget that he will launch such weapons against his neighbors, including Israel, Kuwait, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, and has done so. Inter-continental ballistic missiles aren't the issue. >>>saying that Iran and Jordan are violating the embargo. Wake up man. >>>There isn't an Arab or Muslim in the world who would condone this >>>any more. The hatred being built toward the US for this is >>>unprecedented and deserved. You and BC are martyring the people of >>>Iraq. Long after Saddam is gone this is going to come back to haunt >>>you. Oh well, you can always say he started it. That will mean a >>>lot to the children, brothers, sisters, cousins and friends of the >>>millions of innocent people exterminated by the policies you >>>support. You need to go back and revisit the Mid East. They were the ones who didn't want the U.S. to go in and invade Iraq. The U.S. was in a catch-22. They can't be involved in a nation-building program in a Muslim country yet that same country threatens its neighbors. The U.S. is not acting unilaterally in the area. Until the Sauidis, Syrians, Chinese, French, British, Germans, and the others in the coalition reach a consensus on the situation, it will be the status quo.