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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (3237)	1/22/2003 7:46:41 PM
From: Thomas M.	Respond to of 25898

This is the first time I have seen someone print the obvious, that Saddam's WMD is a deterrent force against Israel's WMD. Despite the qualifiers in the article, it is still remarkable to see this idea appear in the U.S. media. <<< In an extraordinary and previously unreported statement (since the routine hearing on the State Department's budget attracted little press attention), Baker appeared to give credence to Iraq's rationale for developing chemical weapons: "Let me say that ... the use of chemical weapons ... is very disturbing to us. Having said that, I must tell you what Saddam Hussein told members of the Senate [referring to the Dole mission] who visited with him last week. "I am not vouching for these statements. I am simply reporting ... what was reported to us. And that is ... chemical weapons [would be used only] on the assumption that Iraq would have been attacked by nuclear weapons.'' >>> Who Lost Kuwait? When Saddam Hussein was obviously preparing to invade Kuwait, why did the U.S. semd signals that it would not interfere? By Murray Waas January 30, 1991 sfbg.com