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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (46143)	9/22/2002 12:15:16 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi John - my take on it is that the evidence will be forthcoming, and is coming out as we speak. I posted yesterday that we have a pirated plan for gas warfare from the head of the Iraqi Navy. Despite the incongruity of the image of an Iraqi Navy (an Iraqi Navy? with ships and everything?), it's clear evidence that Iraq has poison gas weapons, including VX which is the deadliest nerve gas I am aware of. So there's your chemical WMD. Blair will release his dossier to Parliament three hours before they start debating next week. You'll see more there. The Bush administration has released more classified info to members of Congress who are cleared to receive classified info, and will release more in the future. What you are NOT going to get, IMO, is full, unfettered public access to classified information any time soon. I can predict with confidence that you, JohnM, will not be satisfied by anything that you see prior to our inevitable attack on Iraq. When all is finally revealed, I hope that you won't be among those who argue that it's all been faked, but I am willing to be good money that there are several on this board who will always believe that it's faked so that Bush can establish a New World Order for his oil buddies. The lunatic fringe we always have with us. Edit: oh, and when confronted with evidence that even they can't dispute, the argument will shift to "Iraq has the right to defend itself, how is Iraq any different than any other country, why are you picking on Iraq?" Edit again: I don't see any useful purpose to be served with fighting a straw man. The argument that "Bush must prove there is an immediate danger" is just such a straw man, in my opinion. It's his job to protect the country from being attacked. He's the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. His authority in foreign affairs is plenary. It's not his job to satisfy you that he's correct in his assessments. We don't vote about whether to go to war. That's Congress' job (leaving aside the hundreds of times that past Presidents have initiated military action without the action of Congress.) Write your Congressman and tell him/her how to vote. This is a Constitutional republic. If you don't like the way it turns out, vote 'em out next time.