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: Rob S. who wrote (163668)	3/10/2003 3:34:19 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573718

RE:"Why not give inspections a chance?" 12 years is not a "chance"? RE:" Because Bush faces elections next year and wants to get it out of the way before then and give some time for the wrecked economy to recover. Simple as that." Statements like that tell us you need to do a lot more thinking and research. Jim

To: Rob S. who wrote (163668)	3/10/2003 3:48:13 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573718

Because Bush faces elections next year and wants to get it out of the way before then and give some time for the wrecked economy to recover. I think inspections could clearly be "given a chance" if and only if Saddam were to make the required disclosures. Apparently, what you and other liberals don't understand is that inspections are not designed to find weapons that have been hidden and thus, cannot be counted on to do so. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

To: Rob S. who wrote (163668)	3/10/2003 4:41:40 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573718

Rob, <Why not give inspections a chance?> You realize, of course, that had it not been for Bush, inspectors wouldn't have been in there in the first place? In fact, countries like France were pushing for the easing of sanctions well after Saddam kicked inspectors out. The reality is that inspections are nothing more than a multi-faceted sham. Bush is using inspections to gain support for a war. Saddam is using inspectors as a sort of "human shield." European nations like France are using inspections as a way to prevent a unilateral America from asserting too much control over the Middle East. Not to mention that they profit from the very regimes that they verbally denounce. And to think that all of this could have been prevented had Saddam been a good boy all along. "Why not give inspections a chance," you ask? Because the goal, disarming Iraq, will never be achieved as long as Saddam is in power. In my opinion, it's better to take him out now than wait until he becomes as dangerous as North Korea (which some argue is a bigger threat than Saddam). Plus, there are other benefits (humanitarian, deterrence of other up-n-coming evil regimes, etc.) Tenchusatsu