SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Rascal who wrote (105005)7/12/2003 8:25:40 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
It's a little curious if we cast our mind back to the debate before the war, when the proponents said, Saddam is dangerous because of his propensity to give WMDs to terrorists, and opponents said, Don't go into Iraq, or Saddam will use WMDs on our troops!

So our troops went in with full chem war kit, and put it on dozens of times.

The number of people arguing, Don't be silly, Saddam doesn't have WMDs, that would be: who? I remember a few opponents who argued that he didn't have any at the same time they were arguing that he had them and would use them on our troops. Most were more logical than that, and admitted he probably had them.

Funny how a few months can induce complete amnesia.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News