Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices 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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: SilentZ who wrote (162031)	2/24/2003 10:28:53 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) of 1584438

However, I still can't feel like the fact that he can't prove he doesn't have WMD means that he has them. It's faulty logic. It certainly is NOT faulty logic. a) He HAD known quantities of certain WMD; b) He was required to document any and all destruction of such WMD; c) He cannot document the destruction of these WMD How is this "faulty logic"? He had it. He didn't destroy it. It is fair to assume he didn't misplce it. It is CERTAINLY fair to assume that, had he destroyed it, he would have documented such destruction. Thus he still has it. The logic is iron clad. If you don't agree, please explain where precisely is the breakdown in logic? Not very complicated, if you ask me.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next