But at how high the cost? Taking Saddam out is guaranteed, no one can go up against our armed forces. But what then? How do we put in a govt. in Iraq that's an ally to us? "Nation building" is costly and not guaranteed to turn in our favor. Will we take out all the countries like Iraq (Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, etc.) and put in governments that are on our side and put money into building their "friendly" govt.? Plus, any U.S. military takeover will be seen as "American Imperialism" by a majority of Arabs. This could de-stabilize the region and put in danger governments who are our allies. Check this article out, it talks about the consequences of actions against Iraq: www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/08/01/iraq.senate.ap/index.html Also, even in conservative Scottsdale, Arizona, many Republican residents argue against an American offensive into Iraq. I just do not believe the majority of the nation (Republicans, Democrats, Independents, etc.) wants us to go into Iraq. www.nytimes.com/2002/08/03/politics/03VOIC.html
I suspect at a significantly lower cost than many suspect, as the benefits will far outweigh the costs in the long run. In the short run, it could be messy. We play out Iran's and Saudi's worst fears: we institute a democracy in Iraq. Hopefully it will be infectious, and the s*itpot dictatorships in those countries will fall as well. We don't need any more puppet governments in the region - they don't work as planned. We just need one that isn't A) overtly hostile towards us, and B) will not attack its neighbors and destabilize the region (and oil prices). Democracies have a strong tendency towards avoiding these courses of action. If they remain hostile towards us, then eventually - yes, we will replace their governments. We have to, unless we're content with being under attack indefinitely like the Israelis... Although I suspect that after Iraq at least a few of those named will likely consider changing their ways. For those that don't, the new governments don't necessarily have to be "friendly", either. Just nonhostile and stable - nondisruptive. Democracy for everyone... So will the erection of the next McDonald's in Cairo. So what? Everything we do will be seen as "American Imperialism" by them until their leaders stop feeding them lies. Change the leaders, if they won't change themselves... Saddam's existence is destabilizing. Remove him and everyone around him is safe. Except for the House of Saud and Iran's mullahs - both of which need to go anyway. But the rest? Turkey would quite like to have that madman with his germs put out of business. Syria would quite like to regain some control over its only source of drinking water. Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and the UAE would quite like that madman to the north to stop messing with their oil pricing schemes, and Kuwait in particular would like it very much if he'd quit threatening the regime there with annihilation. The world would very much like it if all of that untapped oil would start flowing, because the Saudis are pricks when it comes to energy pricing... Raise your hand if you're happy with OPEC's stranglehold over the global economy? I for one can't wait to increase the global petroleum supply - and make the Saudis a little less rich. As for support, I haven't seen any recent polls on the subject, but a few months ago it was in the region of 70%-80%and greater. I'd expect that to wane somewhat as the debate goes on and the doomsayers have their fill, but the majority base is solid. You might not like it much in Arizona, but we here in Texas think it's a pretty good idea...
I doubt you think that. Lieberman seems to take an amazing amount of interest in the Middle East. Hmmmm.... I wonder. What could be his concerns. Hmmmm. BTW, where's the cynical conservative backlash? The only reason why Bush is doing this is to reclaim the country and the polls. Kickin' Bin Laden Ass: good. Doing something domestic.... uhhhh, kickin' Sadaam's Ass: good.
Why is this a bombshell? I mean unless I'm mistaken . . .Leiberman *is* Jewish. [which was a big deal in the election of sorts] Jewish people are not exactly enamored with Saddam [nor do i blame them . . . ] In the election it was a big deal of how would he be if he bacame president and need to push the button on the sabbath . . . . . FOR THE RECORD . . I'm not being ANTI-SEMETIC [the generic disclaimer] but him being Jewish affects his views as much as anyman's religion. So I Jewish person wanting to bomb a Muslim nation will never surprise me . . . . . . any more than a US person wanting to bomb Iraq or RUssian back in the day Rocket River call me pessimistic or jaded or cynical
What did you find confusing Brian? Or do you not recall the asinine rhetoric from conservatives on this site that questioned Clinton's motives at every turn... Normal view about the middle east: Nullifying threats to our nation... is a good thing. Conservative view about the middle east: Take out threats to our nation, certainly, but... when Clinton bombed the chemistry factory in N. Africa on advice from the joint chiefs of staff, he did it to distract from the Monica news. -On pressing, I'm sure that most Conspirative Republicans will cite that the joint chiefs of staff must have been ****ing Monica Lewinsky too. LOL.
So, bombing that aspirin factory was a good idea? And its timing really was just coincidence? And what does a "chemistry factory" make? Chemistry? I thought that had to occur naturally-- it couldn't be forced. Wasn't that why the Barkley-Olajuwon-Pippen experiment failed?
Yes, he Jewish...but he's also a Democrat. Hell, he's one of the leading Dems. It's a little odd to see him siding with Bush on this issue at a time when the parties have polarized.
I think its more relevant that he is Ultra-Orthodox Jewish. It seems to influence much of his life in that he does not even work at all on Saturdays for religious purposes. I'm fine with that as long as it doesn't bias his United States foreign policy in favor of Israel and not in favor of what is best for the United States. It is widely known that he is heavily involved with Middle East issues, predominantly Israeli (Jews) vs. Arabs (muslim) issues, is it surprising that he would want war waged against an arab country?? I understand that Israel is our "ally" in the middle east (of course with the billions of dollars of support, plus military aid and weaponry, plus political support who wouldn't be our ally!) but I think it is appalling that UNITED STATES government officials such as Lieberman place their stances based on non-US related issues, when Congress had a vote to Unilaterally support Israel, and even Clinton saying he would "be on the front lines fighting with a rifle for Israel" when he wouldn't even to to Vietnam for the United states. We need to focus on what is best for Americans, not Israeli's. I don't think i've ever seen our government so behind another country. I realize that 2% of America is Jewish and close to 30% of Congress is, but we need to maintain strength in the international community by our fairness and our aherence to freedom and liberty above all. Recently Lieberman headed a committee to give over 200 million dollars to Israel to help them with defense on top of the billions in cash and arms given annually, and of course it was not opposed and the check was sent. I'm sure our welfare system, teachers, and other AMERICANs could use the billions that are sent annually to this little country the size of Rhode Island.
Khan-- You sure are bitter. We've been giving aid to other xcountries for decades...not just Israel. Do you by any chance have a problem with Jews?
Khan - while I don't disagree, this could be said about foreign aid to a whole host of nations other than Israel.
Far from it Refman, I actually have a MUCH bigger problem with the aid given to Egypt and Jordan, but that is not what we are discussing. I also feel the US has a tendency to support totalitarian regimes on one side, yet use that as a basis for an attack in situations such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia. I agree very much with Treeman in the opinion that Saudi Arabia is a time bomb waiting to go off. I feel that the basis for decisions by the United States Government should be based on the best interests of the country and not other factors, and I feel that this is the case. I think our one-sidedness in the whole Arab-Israeli conflict is adversely affecting our economy and the demand for American Products, goods and services in a good portion of the world economy. I'm an economist by nature and feel the governments job is the support the will of the people and maintain the economy. The reason why the US is the lone superpower is not because we are good and the Soviets for example are bad, but it is because of our system of capitalism that allows the US to outspend anyone in regards to military technology, intelligence and gives them control over things like the IMF (International Monetary Fund) which helps lagging economies. This buys power.
What I find odd is the shift in party ideas on this issue. It seems that I remember Democrats espousing more pro-Israel sentiments in the past than Republicans. American Jews historically vote Democrat in major elections. But we now seem to be witnessing a dramatic shift in party allegiance to Israel. Interesting stuff.
The Democrats have to show more support to Israel nowadays. With the passing of the Campaign Finance Reform Act, the Dems have to rely more on hard money contributions. The GOP wins this race hands down, so the Dems need Jewish contributions more than ever. The Dems can't afford to alienate the Jewish bloc for fear of them decreasing their contributions or giving more to the GOP. As we all know, money buys power. This just makes perfect political sense for the Dems.
is that why Clinton says he would fight and die for Israel now??? i never thought of him as being very pro-israeli while in office...maybe i'm wrong. (i've been wrong before! )
Esource: Actually, the GOP has traditionally been a foe of Jews in America and Israel. It is only since 9/11 that the Jews have seen the GOP demonstrate strong support for Israel. The Democrats are the party of American Jews and have been for decades. They have always been supportive of Israel for this reason. They don't HAVE to do anything now because they've always been on their side. Actually, if anyone HAS to show its support of the Jews unfailingly, it is the GOP. They have never been trusted by the Jewish lobby in America.
