Post #73284 by Dope1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (75)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 2

I think you misunderstand my point. They were "right," in the sense that there was not an easy an effective alternative solution to the Iran problem in the form of military invasion. They were right in recognizing that the likely outcome of a military invasion is that the situation doesn't get any better, and we end up wasting enormous resources to come out the other side with the exact same problem we had going in. To wit, an authoritarian dictatorship that both desires to present a security threat to its neighbors and has a large enough economy to be able to acquire the means to present that security threat no matter what the U.S. does.

Then they're even more wrong. Their actions actively accelerated Iran's position in the region and led to the deaths of thousands of people in Israel and beyond.

As to the rest, let it play out.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (75)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.