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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (100641)	6/7/2003 11:53:23 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

The Administration did not say, "We know Iraq had WMD in 1998, and so we presume he still has them now, and we can't take the risk, so we have to invade." Instead, they said, "We know (no doubt, we have proof) Iraq has them today." Actually the administration said plenty of both, as well as noting that according to Resolution 1441, the burden was on Saddam to show what he had done with all chem and bio weapons and materials he had had in 1998 when he kicked out the inspectors. Saddam's response was "Dang, the dog ate my homework" and that just wasn't good enough. Saddam had a 14 month "rush to war" to decide whether to flush the evidence or not. This "nyah, nyah, you didn't find the weapons" will turn out just like the museum looting story, I expect. Suddenly the crime of the ages becomes 50 missing objects of art as all the important stuff turns up in the vaults. Do we hear any apology from the crowd who got hysterical over the museum being looted and how it was all the Marines' fault? Don't hold your breath. Makes me really wonder if any historian's account of anything is even part true, when I see how easy it is to twist and falsify accounts of actions that took place less than six months ago.