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: E who wrote (113228)	8/28/2003 8:07:41 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I'm not going to get into word play to try to justify a false attribution that actually occurred in reality. The unchangeable fact is that immediately after the 2003 SOTUA, liberal media & politicians began to falsely attribute the term "imminent threat" to Bush. Unfortunately his SOTUA clearly stated that Iraq was NOT an "imminent threat". That is irrefutable. I used President Bush's own words in proper context. Why would you think that playing twist & distort out of context will change any objective person's mind? When Bush Outlined the Iraqi Threat Oct 7th, 2002, he said..... IN HIS OWN WORDS..... <font size=4><font color=blue>(Where is any direct implication of "imminent threat" in this speech?)<font size=3><font color=black> ....On September the 11th, 2001, America felt its vulnerability -- even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth. <font size=4><font color=blue>We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat, from any source, that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America..... ....Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons? ....<font size=3><font color=black> .....And, of course, sophisticated delivery systems aren't required for a chemical or biological attack; all that might be required are a small container and one terrorist or Iraqi intelligence operative to deliver it. And that is the source of our <font size=4><font color=blue>urgent concern<font size=3><font color=black> about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups..... <font size=4><font color=blue>....The risk is simply too great that he will use them, or provide them to a terror network..... ....Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. Well, we don't know exactly, and that's the problem..... <font size=3><font color=black> ....If the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy, or steal an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, <font size=4><font color=blue>it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year. And if we allow that to happen, a terrible line would be crossed.<font size=3><font color=black> Saddam Hussein <font size=4><font color=blue>would be<font size=3><font color=black> in a position to blackmail anyone who opposes his aggression. He <font size=4><font color=blue>would be<font size=3><font color=black> in a position to dominate the Middle East. He <font size=4><font color=blue>would be<font size=3><font color=black> in a position to threaten America. And Saddam Hussein <font size=4><font color=blue>would be<font size=3><font color=black> in a position to pass nuclear technology to terrorists. Some citizens wonder, after 11 years of living with this problem, why do we need to confront it now? And there's a reason. We've experienced the horror of September the 11th. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people. Our enemies would be no less willing, in fact, they would be eager, to use biological or chemical, or a nuclear weapon. <font size=4><font color=blue>Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.<font size=3><font color=black> As President Kennedy said in October of 1962, "Neither the United States of America, nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world," he said, "where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nations security to constitute maximum peril." Understanding the threats of our time, knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime, we have every reason to assume the worst, and <font size=4><font color=blue>we have an urgent duty to prevent the worst from occurring.<font size=3><font color=black> whitehouse.gov