Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan B. who wrote (7069)	9/22/2002 11:40:11 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

The conclusion of the article seems to be that Mr. Ritter's stance on Iraq DOES fly in the face of his own prior statements, Your explanation contains an implicit assumption that nothing has changed in Iraq in the years during and since the Gulf War. Furthermore it assumes that the context of the rest of the world has not changed in that time either. Finally there is an assumption that the choice is between killing Saddam and ignoring him with no middle ground. we've heard him say he stands behind ALL of his prior statements There is no inconsistency here, his prior statements were about a prior situation at a prior time. TP

To: Dan B. who wrote (7069)	9/22/2002 11:40:44 AM
From: SOROS	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Ritter is human like everyone else. And, true to form, most humans will compromise just about anything if the price is right. That "love of money" thing is what has always brought out the worst in people, and ultimately, it is that very thing which will lead to man's final destruction. Forget the debates about everyone's motives. Just follow the money trail. It always leads to the truth -- Clinton, Enron, Bush, Tyco, WCOM, Gates, Greenspan, Popes, on and on and on. If everyone was simply satisfied with having ENOUGH, rather than always wanting MORE, just how peaceful would this world be? I remain, SOROS