Politics for Pros- moderated 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 : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (176422)	8/13/2006 12:38:02 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) of 793575

I'm talking about the subset of those who counseled against the engagement in Iraq who are neither one-percenters nor Bush-lied'ers. That subset includes Euterpe and me and lots of others, as I have tried to explain but you are disinclined to recognize. What you are saying then is that in spite of all evidence pointing to Saddam having WMD, you don't believe we should have gone in. Very well. That is a POV. But not one that those of us on the other side were willing to live with. Arguing about it now is a waste of time. I have been posting both sides of the same problem now that we have with Iran. I just put up Barnett's latest column on that. Because Iraq turned out to be a mistake, we probably won't go in to Iran. I hope we don't live to regret it. That again is a "one percent" situation. The consequences of being wrong would be unbelievably horrible.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next