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: stockman_scott who wrote (489900)	11/9/2003 5:48:27 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Intersting reading. Yes, brutality is inherent in war no matter who is fighting. And as same existed in Vietnam, it must also have existed with the Soviets in Afghanastan or with Indonesia against East Timor; and so Rwanda and The Kashmire. Indeed existed it existed with Iraq vs. Iran. But, as a nation viewing it all from afar, whose side are you on? Did the US back Iraq then? And recently we the public were shown a video--what White House or Pentagon figure fed FoxNews this exclusive?--of Saddam's regime torturing his political enemies (people thrown off buildings, fingers cut off, etc.). Was this torture depicted in the aftermath of its war with Iran? Was it tortorous action in the aftermath of an anti-Saddam Kurd or Shite uprising or a coup? I don't think the networks ever qualified this when they showed the FoxNews torture exclusive. Is it possible that Saddam's brutal action was just like the brutal action that happened among US, the Soviet Union, Indonesia and other nation's warriors of war? Hey, all of the above is just another good reason why the US never should have invaded Iraq in the first place. War is a hell every nation should avoid, unless defensive and in direct consequence to being attacked.