War against Iraq...a non self weighting strategy or ..

[Mike Gallo]

a self weighting catastrophe?


Sorry if I am posting in the wrong forum, however after last nights speech, I have a feeling war against Iraq has become inevitable.

I just wonder if George W has taken a non-self weighting strategy and indeed has the nations best interest in making this decision.

I would like other people comments.

Thanks

Michael

[ACPlayer]

George W is pot committed. He has raised and re-raised the pot and simply cannot fold the hand. Only question remaining is whether the opponent will fold (he is not quite as pot commited at GW).

GW will most likely win the pot, but will he leave the table a winner or will his table image suffer as a consequence for the next hand?

Given the high probability of infighting between the various factions at the showdown, one can also ask whether he will be able to leave the room with his money. As TJ described somewhere that when going to a home game he was always concerned about being able to leave with the winnings!

[Net Warrior]

Sadam will remove of his chips from the table and claim "all in". His read is that the floorman will let him get away with it. GW, wearing his white Stetson, warns that he intends to get paid off no matter what. There's going to be quite a mess to clean up afterwards.

[rkiray]

I think King George and his right wing religious fanatics running the country don't care what most people think. Just today, King George said he would not be influenced by protests, no matter how big they got. He clearly isn't interested in the opinions of other world leaders and their citizens. I think he is only interested in his core voters, mostly evangelical Christians who want a war in the Middle East because they believe it is an omen for the second coming of Jesus. King George scares me to death. I thought he would be more like his daddy whom I thought was a good moderate Republican who served his country well for decades. He was only so-so as a president, but that's alot better than his kid.

BTW, I am not a liberal kook. I spent fifteen years working in the defense industry designing military communications equipment. I fully supported the first Gulf War, and I have no problem taking out Hussein if he actually does something. But for over a decade, I've seen no proof that he has caused any major problems outside Iraq. If there is proof of this, King George needs to show it. I also support the US action in Afganistan and against Quada. If their is compelling evidence linking the two, I will change my mind. I'm not convinced yet. And from what I've read, most of the world's leaders with much better information than I have arn't convinced either.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Anyone who has read my posts knows I'm no liberal, either. Neither am I a Christian conservative. I'm a libertarian who thinks the only thing more dangerous than government is religion. Nor am I a big fan of Dubya.

That being said, how much more proof do you need that Iraq was involved in 9-11? Atta met with Iraqi intelligence more than once in the 2 years before the attacks. At times I feel like I've been transported back to 1938, listening to the debate about whether or not to get involved in the war in europe. Yet in 1938, we had no idea Hitler was executing innocent civilians. There is ample proof today that Saddam has gassed entire Kurdish villages. I'm not saying this means we must attack, but let's at least establish that the world has a moral responsibility to get him out of power; a responsibility that Germany and France are abrogating out of 1) there fear of internal muslim reprisal and 2) their innate anti-semitism. I'll be clear on this: Germany and France do not have the moral high ground here, we do.

Leaving that, there is also a common misconception that this is a war for oil. That is patently absurd. The US pumped more crude than anyone in the last six months, and we buy more oil from Venezuela, Norway and Mexico than from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. The myth behind this misconception is that oil is "too expensive." Leaving aside the fact that over 60% of the price of gasoline is taxes, gas is still cheaper in real terms than it was in 1965. And despite what most people think, the recent price increases at the pumps has more to do with political unrest in Venezuela than the middle east.

War is never the best solution, but sometimes it is innevitable. Al-Qaeda will attack us again. You can take that to the bank. They represent the religious fanatics we need to worry about. Their goal is to destroy our free, open, mercantile, capitalist society. We're going to have to fight this war for western culture sooner or later. We might as well choose when.

Oh, yeah, then there's North Korea. But that's another story.

[Easy E]

"Oh, yeah, then there's North Korea. But that's another story."
and not a book you want to tackle lightly...

...plus, Iran's nuclear capabilities, along with India/Pakistan, might be future volumes that we're forced to read in the (near?) future...