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: stockman_scott who wrote (113196)	8/28/2003 5:27:26 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Funny, George Bush never said Iraq presented an "imminent threat" either. However, many democrats falsely attributed that comment to Bush, then demonized him with additional lies based on their own false attribution. The same could be said of this so called pre-emptive strike & unilateral action. So are you saying that Mr. Clark is equally reprehensible as most democratic politicians?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (113196)	8/29/2003 1:11:36 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi stockman_scott; Re: "Carl: I don't think its fair to judge Wesley Clark based on 1 comment he made." Unfortunately, that is *the only comment he has made* about what his future policy on Iraq would be. I'm sorry, but that's all the information I have, and with that kind of BS, I'm voting Republican. Re: "He has said Iraq did NOT present this country with an 'imminent threat' and he WOULD NOT have authorized a dangerous and expensive pre-emptive strike on Iraq. He also said that by attacking Iraq it could trigger more terrorism and look what we have. We need a leader who is willing to work with allies (and the U.N.) and only use war as A LAST RESORT. It's now very clear that this was 'an elective war'...It's George Bush's war -- and there was such a rush to attack Iraq WITHOUT adequate postwar planning that we are all paying the price." All this is obviously true, but it speaks to what Clark would have done in the past. None of that applies now. We're in the present. We're in Iraq. What will he do now? The only answer I've got from him is: " Our troops over there are having a very hard time right now. If we gave those troops another division or two, they wouldn’t turn us down,” Clark said" I read this as pretty much equivalent to what Nixon said in 1972. Four more years of useless war, with the usual partisan bickering over who is to blame for the quagmire. -- Carl