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: TimF who wrote (164450)	3/16/2003 10:03:50 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572673

I didn't say we moved 200k men to the Gulf just to get Iraq to comply. I said " "To the extent they are doing the job at all it is because of the threat to Iraq from the armed might of the US. It it wasn't for Bush's actions and policies there would be no inspectors in Iraq." Reread what you wrote and maybe you might see why you look to be talking from both sides of your mouth. You then said "You're welcome to spin that way certainly A. Fleischer has been doing it for weeks now." In other words your saying my statement that the inspectors are there only because of the threat to Iraq from the armed forces of the US, is spin. But it isn't. You might have other spin to respond to but my statement was simple fact. Fact? How do you know at what point Saddam would have let the inspectors back in? Bush did so many things all within a short period of time, its hard to discern what was the deciding factor. One of them was moving 200k soldiers to the Gulf. Maybe that was necessary; maybe it wasn't. I don't know but you certainly don't know either. So what you're saying isn't fact but rather your speculation. ted