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 (170367)	6/2/2003 7:02:13 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583520

What was the reality since the Clinton administration was uncertainty about WMD. Certainty about WMD in Iraq existed since the 80s, maybe even the late 70s. Yes, I know that.......in the 80's, we sold them components for their WMD. What was uncertain was what happened to all the WMD that Iraq had not accounted for. Yes, I know that.......that's why UN inspectors were sent in last fall. That is still uncertain. What are you trying to say? Show me a poll that gave a clear majority of the people [more than 60%] wanting the war without UN approval or solid evidence of WMD. I said majority, not some arbitrary level above majority. As for 60% polls that didn't specify anything about UN approval or evidence of WMD did show 60+% approval, it was only when the question was phrased something like "If we don't find evidence of WMD do you still support the war?", or "Do you support a war against Iraq even without UN approval?", that there was a problem getting what you call a "clear majority" It gets better than that. Even simplistic questions, bordering on the ridiculous, like "What if hundreds of thousands of American troops have to be sent?", or "what if there are hundreds of American casualties?" are immediate cause for the percentage favoring of war to drop below 50%. My point still stands........this war was not a popular one, and it took heavy persuasion and threats of serious WMD to get the Amer. public to get behind Bush. Its why finding WMD is critical, and if they are not found, then Bush and his administration will be considered liars by many of us. theangryliberal.com ted Message #170367 from twfowler at Jun 2, 2003 6:25 PM What was the reality since the Clinton administration was uncertainty about WMD. Certainty about WMD in Iraq existed since the 80s, maybe even the late 70s. What was uncertain was what happened to all the WMD that Iraq had not accounted for. That is still uncertain. Show me a poll that gave a clear majority of the people [more than 60%] wanting the war without UN approval or solid evidence of WMD. I said majority, not some arbitrary level above majority. As for 60% polls that didn't specify anything about UN approval or evidence of WMD did show 60+% approval, it was only when the question was phrased something like "If we don't find evidence of WMD do you still support the war?", or "Do you support a war against Iraq even without UN approval?", that there was a problem getting what you call a "clear majority"