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: hmaly who wrote (160062)	2/5/2003 5:31:07 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578006

Ted Re...The Germans were not the only ones: How did Iraq Gets Its Weapons? We sold them them? Absolutely, when did I ever say the US didn't sell Iraq weapons, even some WMD. That is is fact how we absolutely know Saddam has some, we still have the receipts. Nonetheless, that doesn't change the fact that Germany also has the receipts from their manufacturers. In that article I posted, you can see that Schroeder was told by his intelligence that Iraq absolutly has WMD. They know because Germany sold them to Saddam before and after the embargo. So why is Schroeder saying Gw has no proof, when he knows Saddam has them. First let me say........I don't know this Asia Times publication any better than you do. I simply posted an article from there at one time. That's means I don't know if the accusations they are making are reasonable. I don't know if Herr Pfluger of the German Parliament is a reasonable person or someone looking to start trouble. I don't know what Schroeder knows and doesn't know. I do know that its surprising that Pfluger says its not okay for him to release alleged secret documents but it is okay for Schroeder......that's doesn't make sense. I would also like to know Schroeder's response to his accusations. Having said all that, as far as I can tell there seems to be two theories re Iraq and WMD. One is that most if not all WMD were destroyed after the Kuwaiti war, and the other is that Iraq hid much of its WMD and has built more since that same war. Amer. and Brit intelligence and France and Germany believe the former theory is correct while Bush, Blair and apparently German intelligence believe the latter theory is correct. The UN inspectors were to assist us in determining which theory is the correct one........that doesn't seem to be happening. And, if the people of Germany knew of the extent of Germany's complicity in helping Saddam obtain those weapons,and if the German people knew Saddam absolutely still has them, would the German people still oppose taking them away. I don't know what the German people do and don't know. One of my German friends seems very well informed and he is adamantly against the war. He's also a conservative btw and did not vote for Schroeder. That is the question Mr Pfluger asks. I think you would do well to read that article again and ask yourself, if you were a German citizen, would you want your gov. to deny the proof exists, when you know it exists, and would you want to be complicit should Saddam either use the weapons himself, or give them to terrorist. Germans denied during WWII, that their fuhrer was gassing Jews, they said they didn't know as an excuse. Can they plausably use that as an excuse again, when this time they know, the gas Saddam intends to use on Israel was supplied by them. Again, I don't know the credibilty of Herr Pfluger......there are some crazy members of the Bundestag. Then, our friendship with Saddam turned sour when he attacked Kuwait.......I guess we couldn't let all that Kuwaiti oil get into his hands. What kind of liberal doublespeak is this. You know full well, the US went in as part of a Un coalition force. While not letting Saddam get his hand on the oil, is part of it, aren't you overlooking the human decency side, and isn't human decency one of liberalisms prime tenets. If it is, why are you abandoning it to support Saddam. If human decency is the issue why are we not in the Ivory Coast right now.....people are getting slaughtered left or right.......or Nigeria for that matter. There are probably ten countries where the citizens are in serious trouble. Conservatives seem to get compassionately concerned with the welfare of a people coincidently when oil happens to figure into the equation. I know there is no relationship but it is funny how it seems to reoccur over and over. Do you think he attacked Kuwait because he didn't think his western friends would mind. Absolutely not. Saddam attacked Kuwait for the oil, more specifically, the money he could get, so he could buy more arms. Saddam guessed then, as he is guessing now, that the US would be too chickensh&& to do anything about it. He was wrong then, and liberal peaceniks nonwithstanding, he is wrong now. GW is no Bill. He thought the US would be too chickenshit because the Reagan and Bush administrations led him to believe we were all friends. It would seem Saddam doesn't understand GOP politics and friendship, huh? ted Enter symbols or keywords for search: QuotesStock TalkChartsNewsPeople Symbol Lookup Subject Titles Only Full Text Go to Top Terms of Use Got a comment, question or suggestion? Contact Silicon Investor.

To: hmaly who wrote (160062)	2/5/2003 7:21:15 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578006

If it is, why are you abandoning it to support Saddam. No he is not. He is saying that now there is a clear peaceful alternative. The article in the Sunday Herald is not new news, but it is damning. It says that two Republican presidents (and its allies) created this monster for coming administrations to deal with . Ray has been pretty hard on the same Clinton that had to deal with the mess left behind by these two careless republicans. Saddam attacked Kuwait for the oil, more specifically, the money he could get, so he could buy more arms. At the time it was said that Iraq was upset about Kuwait pumping more oil from "common" border wells than agreed upon. It has also been reported that Saddam signaled his intentions in Kuwait through the then US ambassador in Iraq and the US gave Saddam ambiguous feedback. What the true motive was really will never be written in history. What we know quite clearly is that today this matter can be contained without death and destruction. Al