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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DavesM who wrote (483281)	10/29/2003 1:01:17 PM
From: jackhach	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

So let me understand this if I may: > Your assertion is that because the US had troops in SA that Osama attacked the WTCs? ..this is partly true, and it indeed provided ammunition to Al-Quieda to justify its madness, however, are you at the same time stating that because the US had troops in SA (in an effort to contain Iraq) that Saddam was therefore linked to 9-11? Second: Please provide me and the "world" the "official" State Department evidence of a Saddam and Al-Quieda link. -JH

To: DavesM who wrote (483281)	10/29/2003 1:07:39 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Bush declares "Down is UP!" Monkey-president Dubya, having asked the Iraqi insurgents to "Bring 'em on!", is confronted with a rising tide of violent resistance to the American occupation of Iraq. Recently both the U.N. and the Red Cross lost volunteers to terrorists, in addition to the soldiers we lose every day. Our monkey-president claims that the terrorists are showing "desperation" by increasing the level of violence, and claims this shows "progress"? I think Iraq will calm down about the same time as Israel.

To: DavesM who wrote (483281)	10/29/2003 1:47:46 PM
From: Steve Dietrich	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

<<The cost of containment, was 9/11. The reason that I can say this, is because when bin Laden declared war on the United States, two of his specific complaints were: the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia and U.S. enforcement of UN Sanctions.>> This is a good point. According to Bob Woodward, the first President Bush and his cabinet felt that they could get Iraq out of Kuwait equally well with either force or sanctions. They opted for force because that was the only way to legitimize a permanent U.S. force in the region. Therefore the rise of Bin Laden and 9-11 go back to this terrible miscalculation by the first Bush administration. Also by invading Iraq we've once again empowered and aided Bin Laden. Sadaam was a hated secular leader who crushed resistance and religious leaders with an iron hand. Bin Laden often called for Sadaam's overthrow. We did his dirty work for him. And now the Mullahs are thriving. Also, you think our troops in Saudi Arabia were an inspiration to Al Qaeda, what will the complete occupation with a couple hundred thousand troops in Iraq do? We'll be there for at least a decade. Steve Dietrich

To: DavesM who wrote (483281)	10/29/2003 2:23:10 PM
From: Don Hurst	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

>>"Iraq and al Qaeda have been tied - captured Iraqis and al Qaeda members have apparently confirmed this (as well as Iraqi documents seized after the war)."<< Great use of the word "apparently" and those "Iraqi documents"....were they found buried in the same backyard with those nuc documents that came from the local library? And btw, I understand those "Iraqi documents" were Arabic translations of Washington Times columns, WSJ editorials and Newsmax net articles confirming the Al Qaeda cooperation.