Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

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

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ilaine who wrote (36937)	8/11/2002 1:10:12 AM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Here's A Possible Scenario.FWIW. They were 90 - 95% complete when they began receiving orders to pass information not under the inspection guidelines. They did so reluctantly but were discovered during the process and were confronted by S.H. When they could not offer plausable reason for their activities , S.H. got pissed and knew what they were up to. They called in for guidance and were told to bail. Soon as they were out of harm's way ,Iraq was bombed. They came back and went with the contrived story that they were being hindered in their inspections, as any good soldiers would at the time. Now that Iraq faces the ultimate challenge , Ritter feels it necessary to set the record straight for two reasons. 1) To ensure he is not going to go to his death bed knowing he contributed to an attack based on faulty information. 2) To ensure there is enough debate so that no attack will take place unless deemed perfectly necessary. Just a scenario.......maybe.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next