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: dumbmoney who wrote (136094)	6/9/2004 9:25:47 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) of 281500

Ritter's pre-war claim was that Iraq was qualitatively disarmed. Whether or not Iraq had some residual stocks - it turns out Iraq had nothing - was irrelevant to the question of whether Iraq was a "threat" that required "preemting". I know what his claims were. I just don't know what evidence he based it upon... Just as he claims Bush needed "evidence" of Saddam's non-compliance, he should have been required to provide evidence of Saddam's compliance. And that would be hard to prove when there UNMOVIC, itself, published a 175 page document on March 3, 2003 (just before the war broke out) displaying all the areas in which Saddam remained in non-compliance with his disarmament obligations. The bottom line is that UNSCOM was "kicked out" of Iraq in 1998 and there had been NO FUTHER INSPECTIONS BY ANYONE. So for Scott Ritter to try and refute the claims and assertions of almost every major intelligence operation on the planet, as well as to simply brush aside the very examples of non-compliance that he assisted in revealing, was, if anything, highly disingenuous. Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next