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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (376897)	3/23/2003 2:21:43 PM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Lizzie, re:Clinton France, Germany, and Russia defended saddam in the UN. Let me know how Clinton would have instituted the regime change differently. Have you forgotten Clinton went into the former Yugoslavia without the UN? Steve

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (376897)	3/23/2003 2:25:08 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Clinton was the REAL failure in diplomacy during his 8 years. Clinton is WHY we had 91101. Clinton is WHY the French thought they could use the UN to stop us. Clinton is WHY we will have to kill millions of Islamics over the next 20 years just to drag the rest of them into civilization. The myth of Bush's "failed diplomacy" is one more left wing propaganda lie. This lie has broken the last of their influence in America, and they are the NEXT enemy that we are about to deal with. IT MATTERS WHO'S PRESIDENT. The extent of the comprehensive Clinton Disaster is still revealing itself in EVERY area of policy and foreign events. Those Senators who abandoned their constitutional oaths to prop him up in the White House have American blood on their hands, and America WILL remember...

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (376897)	3/23/2003 3:07:11 PM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 769670

LOL. It's funny Lizzie, but I'm increasingly disappointed with my fellow Americans. It seems this war is so polarizing that very few people are thinking straight. Either they are completely belligerent and claiming that if you say things could have been handled better, you must be for Saddam, or they are completely left leaning saying that we should have dealt peaceably with Saddam. What about somewhere in the middle? I'm smack in the middle. I think Saddam needs to go and war was ultimately the only way we were going to achieve that. We've tried everything else, from assassinations to coups and nothing worked. However, it's undeniable that this administration doesn't have a diplomatic bone in its collective body, and that is going to cost all Americans more than is evident right now.