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 : RAMTRONIAN's Cache Inn

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: happygambler1934 who wrote (13455)7/22/2007 6:19:06 PM
From: Sr K  Read Replies (1) of 14464
 
If you are correct, who would you have had the United States attack? And why did we choose to attack Iraq?

I think NR's point, that you call OPINION, is that we are not safer, primarily, if not solely, due to our military response to the attack of 9/11/2001.

If you know the facts you cite, do you not think Saddam Hussein knew them?

Are we not in Iraq because:

1. Cheney first and then GWB (or, unlikely, the other way around) wanted revenge for Saddam Hussein attempting to assassinate GHWB.
2. SH knew that.
3. October 2002 authorization, blah blah blah
4. SH intentionally "called" GWB by not allowing the U.N. inspectors in and not complying with U.N. resolutions.
5. SH knew better than most what would happen if the US invaded.
6. SH expected the US would lose and Iraq would win.
7. At his trial, did he have the demeanor of a loser or a winner? What did he know that we all know now?
8. We have twisted our motivations and intentions to now wanting Iraq to "take over" control of their country and to stay until they stand up and until they ask us to leave.
9. Did someone forget that we invaded them?

10. Now GWB says we are there because "al Qaeda" is there but the al Qaeda in Iraq or al Qaeda in Mesopotamia is not the al Qaeda.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext