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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (172342)	7/22/2003 9:52:46 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576617

At least the latter will be no more shocking than Britney's admission that she's no longer a virgin. You're funny...

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (172342)	7/22/2003 10:29:14 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1576617

Ted, A responsible leader doesn't go to war for the bogus reasons established by Bush prior to attacking Iraq. Again, Bush was not the first to declare Iraq had WMD. Clinton did back in 1998. And no Democrat objected back then. It does not matter how far Clinton went in Operation Desert Fox. Excuse me but it does matter........its the difference between millions and hundreds of billions of dollars; the difference between no loss of life and hundreds, maybe thousands. I know.......they're all numbers and numbers get lost in the shuffle but not this time. His actions obviously cost less than Bush's, but they also accomplished absolutely nothing. But the real point is that Clinton struck Iraq because of WMD. They kept Saddam in his place. He wasn't attacking his neighbors any more. I think Clinton's approach did a lot of good esp. because it cost us very little. So while you accuse Bush of lying, you might as well accuse Clinton of lying as well. At least the latter will be no more shocking than Britney's admission that she's no longer a virgin. Actually, Britney and Bush are not that far apart as people plus she grew up in LA, right next door to TX. I think you may be on to something. ted

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (172342)	7/22/2003 11:56:43 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1576617

Again, Bush was not the first to declare Iraq had WMD. Clinton did back in 1998. And no Democrat objected back then. Clinton bombed the country because it refused full access to UN inspectors who we now know destroyed much of the WMD infrastructure in Iraq...so don't say that nothing was accomplished. It's not true and we now know the extent to which it is not true. Bush invaded it after the UN was given unfettered access. Can you spell premeditation, revenge, ulterior motive, manipulation, or being the victim of it or all of the above? Al