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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (100573)	6/7/2003 2:37:14 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi KLP; Re: "And the point was that even Clinton knew Iraq had WMD." It's possible that Iraq did have WMD at the time that Clinton did Desert Fox. But that has little to do with the question at hand, which is this: *Did Bush have "top secret" evidence that Iraq had WMD in March 2003 or didn't he?* I don't know how to explain this to you in simpler terms. Back in 1980, I bought a pistol. I kept it for many years. I still had it in 1995, though I stored the ammunition separately so as to make it pretty safe. Finally, sometime between then and 1999, I sold the pistol to a gun shop. I don't have it anymore. That's my story, believe it or not. Now, since I admit to owning a pistol back in 1995, are you going to stand there and accuse me of still having it? Are you going to ransack my house in an unsuccessful search for my non existent pistol and then claim that you're still looking for it and are going to find it someday? And after 2 months have gone by and you still haven't found any sign of my pistol are you going to stand there like a self-righteous prig and claim that you were justified in killing 8,000 innocent Iraqi civilians and untold thousands of innocent Iraqi men because I admitted to owning it back in 1995? A man admits his mistakes. When is Bush or Blair going to admit that they were wrong about Iraq having WMDs? What went on in Clinton's administration, vis a vis Iraq's possession of WMDs doesn't matter, except that it suggests that everybody, not just Bush and Blair, had reason to doubt Saddam's word. But Bush and Blair are not in trouble for saying that Saddam could not be believed. Everybody knew this already. Bush and Blair are in trouble for saying that Saddam was lying when he said that Iraq had gotten rid of its WMDs. Bush and Blair claimed that they were privy to secret spy reports that proved this. Bush and Blair were wrong. They were either liars, or their spies were incompetent. So far, it appears that they told their spies what to say. Your attempts to impugn Saddam Hussein's history is pointless. What you should be doing is protecting Bush and Blair's honor by claiming that those "top secret" reports really did prove that Iraq had WMDs, and that therefore, it was the spies that made the mistake, not Bush and Blair. But that would be admitting that the spy services are fallible, wouldn't it. And you want to believe that the US and UK are perfect countries, which never make mistakes. Okay. Then where are the f'ing WMDs? I'm a conservative man. My motto is "My country right or wrong". This means that no matter what my country does, it will always remain my country. The full toast is (something like): "To our country. In her foreign affairs, may she always be right. But to our country, right or wrong." And this is what I believe. And here, in this forum, I influence my country to do what is right. The right wing ideologues that support obviously false versions of reality believe in "my country right or right". They can't imagine that their country could possibly ever have done something wrong. They're idiots. Hence, they went on and on about how it was certain that Iraq had WMDs, and now they're standing around looking like idiots. -- Carl