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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: KLP who wrote (40012)8/26/2002 5:48:51 PM
From: jcky  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Do you honestly think that there is no direct link established?

It's not what I think that's important. It's the evidence that the Bush administration must present to the American public that will count. And if he can't do it then there's going to be a major problem with invading Iraq.

Just what would you say if there IS a direct link ....??

I have already address this issue with CobaltBlue. If there evidence for a direct link between al-Qaida and Iraq, the Bush administration is authorized to use military force according to the resolution passed following 9/11. But this country would still be foolish to invade, occupy, and reconstruct Iraq unilaterally.

And if there isn't, then you are saying "OK, just sit around, waiting for Saddam and his henchmen to do something...and if "something happens, something happens"....

An aggressive containment policy with a no fly zone is not just sitting around. But since you're so intent on invasion, I hear the Marines are still looking a few good men.

If one or several of our cities are vaporized, and/or cities throughout the world contact Ebola or smallpox or whatever else....

Oh, I see... Saddam is just going to give away his small pox virus (if he even has it) to terrorists who are intent on using them against Americans. In the process he is signing his own death sentence, and we all know what a martyr Saddam really is at heart.