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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (150656)	11/2/2004 4:59:42 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Respond to of 281500

An apples to oranges comparison. The Allies were not occupiers of France. The Allies and France shared similar basic cultures, had a history of cooperation dating back centuries, and even shared common religions. The Allies had not been working against France for decades leading into the War. The Allies had not been bombing France into the stone age for an entire decade. The Allies didn't invade France with a primary goal of establishing long term strategic bases on their homeland, nor did the Allies invade to secure significant quantities of natural resources from now until eternity. Clearly apples to oranges. In Iraq all this is ass over teakettle. - invasion for "strategic" purposes which serve the US first and foremost. - invasion with the goal of secure access to oil, in perpetuity - invasion because, well, they knew they could beat Saddam. Easily. In Iraq? Find me a poll of the people that suggests "coalition" forces are anything but an occupying force. Better yet: when, honestly, do you believe the US will be out of Iraq? 1 year? 5 years? Never?