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: Hawkmoon who wrote (119711)11/16/2003 5:03:34 PM
From: E  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
These are very interesting and informative posts you've made. Substantive, too.

Ritter is a mess. Nowhere am I arguing that he didn't change his position. Nor do I know the ins and outs of why he did (aside from enabling the documentary deal.)

The position he vociferously took in the leadup to the war, unhappily enough, was correct: he said the WMD were no longer there. They seem not to be.

Now he has something to say about Improvised Explosive Devices. You are evidently among those who find the IED scenario as described by Ritter in the Christian Science Monitor far fetched. I am among those who hope you are correct but won't be surprised if you aren't.

Over time, we'll no doubt learn more about IED.

BTW, when it comes to assessing the contradictory assertions of liars, the fact that George Bush in no uncertain terms stated "We have found them," of the WMD, and now says something a little different... well, it's all very complex. It's also interesting that Bush said recently that there was no connection between Saddam and al Qaeda (correcting Cheney), but we now have a leaked CIA memo dated just last month contending in detail exactly the opposite!

Maybe it's harsh calling Bush a liar. Being a dimwit is sort of exculpatory.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext