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: Skeet Shipman who wrote (45743)	9/21/2002 3:50:15 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) of 281500

That is what Ritter was saying It is? In 1998 he was testifying they retained their weapons capabilities. Just one example, from a recent interview: Asman: Let me read to you a couple of quotes. I'm sure you've heard it before, but these are from four years ago, when you sounded about Saddam Hussein not very much different from the way President Bush did today at the U.N. This one is from this week--August 30, 1998--"Six months is a very reasonable time scale for Iraq to resume weapons capabilities." The second two are from Good Morning America also in August of '98. First, "Iraq's job is to avoid bringing the world's attention to the fact they've retained these weapons," and then, "Iraq retains the capability to launch a chemical strike." Sounds like Saddam Hussein is very dangerous and could mount a chemical strike right now. Ritter: And what point are you trying to make? Asman: Do you disagree with that in any way, shape or form? Ritter: I don't disagree with anything I've ever said. Why in God's name would I disagree with something I've said? Thanks to CB: siliconinvestor.com Derek

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next