Post
by madmallard » Mon Jun 30, 2003 7:32 pm
good concerns.
I dont think finding the WMD will be much trouble as time rolls on. .
if we haven't found anything by christmas it may be time to get uneasy.
And hunting down Saddam and kin is a bonus, not a primary objective, so I'm not too concerned about that. Yes, the money can fund terror, but he's not directly interested in terror on the United States on the other side of the world. he's interested in terror on our 'interests.' which means he'll probably be looking to try and set himself up in another government, and pressure US to get out, then stage a revolution/coup and get back in iraq, or wherever.
but as that stands, the money talked about is not enough to fund an army or anything, so you're right in the problem isnt direct, its amorphous.
but i was more concerned with the commodities at risk. The world is too dependant on oil to have him in charge of a big chunk of it. That commodity is more valueable to our cause than any cash he might've made off with.
As far as the millitant attacks. a squad of Iraqis may be organised and attack, and while the death of an American/british serving is horrible; the average kill ratio has been about 70:1 since the major invasion concluded and 'occuptation' began. so for that one soldier that died, 70 iraqi men were wiped out.
more specifically to the election, theres nobody on the democratic ticket that people will want to vote for facing against bush. and they know that. Thats why all the 'serious' candidates aren't talking about how they're running for president because they know most likely they'll get shot down and ruin any chance to run again.
they'll chicken out and put a mickey mouse candidate up rather than have the stones to go for it anyways because they, like all politicians, are only concerned with keeping their job when it comes down to it.
?
. I'm not leftist enough to vote Green or Socialist 8) .
