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: stockman_scott who wrote (45669)9/20/2002 3:28:46 PM
From: Sam  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 281500
 
Great post, thanks for posting.

Even though I know the hawks will just shrug their shoulders and say, "there goes that Ritter again."

<<Saddam Hussein didn’t kick out the U.N. inspectors. They were ordered out by the U.S. government, which then used information they provided to bomb 100 locations that had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction. So the weapons inspectors were used by the United States.>>

<<I think this is more about the people surrounding George W. Bush—Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton, Richard Perle—who have committed their political and intellectual capital to regime removal. They’ve invested in this so much that they’ve boxed themselves into a rhetorical and ideological corner where they have no ability to maneuver. We’ve trapped ourselves with our own rhetoric, with our own speculations, with our own ideology, our own politics. I think that’s what this is all about. This is about politics.

If any other head of state used the term “regime change” it would be called terrorism.>>



To: stockman_scott who wrote (45669)9/20/2002 3:52:39 PM
From: Rollcast...  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
"ex-Marine Scott Ritter, who served as the chief U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq until 1998, has relentlessly presented arguments against invading Iraq in talks around the country, in op-ed pieces in major newspapers, and on radio and television."

They keep forgetting the $400,000 disclaimer.

Not very objective of them, is it?