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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (158001)	1/14/2003 12:52:50 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1591174

Al Re...I can come up with as many obscure and non obscure links that will refute such claims. What makes you think Debka net is any more obscure in Israel than the NYT is considered obscure here. I have always maintained Saddam has paid the terrorist organizations to attack Israel, and I went to the Israeli newspapers to prove it. I showed you links where Terik Aziz says Baghdad is raising the payments to terrorists who attack Israel from 10,000 to 25,000. If Saddam isn't involved with the terrorist, why is he paying out $25,000 a crack. You say you have obscure links to show otherwise. If they disprove Saddam is paying terrorist to bomb Israel, bring em on. I even showed links directly linking Saddam to Al Qaeda; which is way beyond what my original contention,that Saddam was connected to terrorist organizations which attack Israel. Show me why I should believe you. I'll bet you can't even dispute the Al Qaeda connections, much less, the other ones. You have never specified how we could possibly hunt down Al Qaeda without invading numerous countries. <<<<<<<<Just listen to yourself for a moment.>>>> Hey, you are the one who stated he believed OBL and Al Qaeda was pure evil and should be gotten rid of. However, you refuse to consider that installing a democratic gov. in Iraq may be the best way to achieve such an aim. I have laid out my reasons why. Now, why don't you state just how you intend to achieve your objective, without sending in troops to root out the terrorists. Negotiations haven't worked so far, and aren't likely to work, as you claim Al Qaeda is stateless. Just whom do you propose we negotiate with? You also claim that OBL is caused by a clash of civilizations> I'll buy that. Now what is your plan to eliminate the clash, without reforming the middle east. An America that works for peace, is fair, is not arrogant and does not break the rule of law. Why wouldn't a democratic Iraq not be working for peace. How would the US protecting its interests and that of its allies be against national law. Just because you say it is, doesn't mean it is. GW has gone through the UN, Blix announced just this A.M. that the inspectors may have found a bid cache of chemicals, and Koffi Anon announced this AM that Iraq wasn't in compliance. So just what law are you talking about. What is really funny, is that just this morning, there are reports that Saddam is considering going into exile. Wouldn't that put a lot of mud on the dems faces. GW didn't even have to blow up any tents, and the butcher of Baghdad scurries. Just goes to show you that a guy who means what he says can get things done with far less damage, than your 11 yrs of negotiations.