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.

Pastimes : My House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (2516)	10/10/2002 12:23:34 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 7689

Interesting article, but you have to realize that the Guardian is the most liberal of U.K. newspapers and likely to put its own slant on the information it receives.I'm not 100% convinced of the need to invade Iraq to protect the USA as long as we monitor him very closely, but there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam is an evil SOB (he even had his own son-in-laws murdered!) and that the average Iraqi citizen would ne better off with a more humanitarian regime.

To: E who wrote (2516)	10/10/2002 4:42:03 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 7689

How many dictators have: invaded two neighbors causing the deaths of over a million people, fired ballistic missiles at civilians of two other countries, tried to have assassinated an ex-Prez of the US, harbored Al Quaeda and other terrorist fugitives, attacked civilians with chemical weapons, attacked the soldiers of an enemy country with chemical weapons, conducted bio weapons experiments on human subjects, committed genocide, and have weaponized aflatoxin, a tool of the most horrific sort of mass murder (slow agonizing death by liver cancer aimed at children) for which there is no other purpose.....???? Saddam has made the case himself for all who care to see it...