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: AK2004 who wrote (492726)	11/14/2003 4:44:24 PM
From: Joel Karlinsky	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

The only terrorism Saddam supported was in his own country. The Saudis supported terrorism, we should have invaded them and blown the hell out of their country. And you're correct, we must correct extremism, i.e., BUSH HAS GOT TO GO. There is no one more extreme than him.

To: AK2004 who wrote (492726)	11/15/2003 10:52:48 AM
From: Doug R	Respond to of 769670

Not-So-Honest George The Program on International Policy Attitudes, a research center down at the University of Maryland, has just released the latest in a series of polls its been doing on U.S. public attitudes about the war in Iraq. pipa.org Interestingly, the latest survey shows that, despite the administration's agit-prop campaign, Americans seem to be gradually absorbing some basic truths about the war in Iraq -- like the fact that it was A.) Unnecessary from a national security point of view: A majority of Americans believes that the Bush administration went to war precipitously on the basis of incorrect assumptions. An overwhelming majority believes that the administration portrayed Iraq as an imminent threat, while a majority believes that the administration did not have evidence for this and that it was not in fact the case. B.) Unjustified under international law: A majority of Americans believe that the evidence that the US had on Iraq did not meet the proper international standards for going to war without UN approval. While a strong majority believes countries have a right to overthrow a hostile government if they have strong evidence that they are in imminent danger of being attacked with WMD, or that the government is providing substantial support to a terrorist group that has attacked them, only a minority also believes that the US had, or now has, such evidence on Iraq. An interesting footnote: Q: Do you think the Bush administration, before the war, did or did not portray Iraq as an imminent threat to the US? Did: 87% Did not: 11% No answer: 2% So it seems that in this case, at least, the conservative campaign to rewrite history isn't making much headway. Army 6 Buildings 0 U.S. military officials say an AC-130 gunship destroyed a former Iraqi Republican Guard building, believed to have been used recently by insurgents to plan attacks against U.S. forces. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Along the Syrian border, U.S. Air Force F-16 fighter jets dropped two satellite-guided bombs Thursday night on a three-story building in Husayba used by insurgents to store ammunition and launch attacks, the 82nd Airborne Division said. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Codenamed "Iron Hammer," the sweep began on Wednesday night when an AC-130 Spectre gunship, equipped with heavy and light-calibre cannon delivering devastating firepower, shot up an empty textile warehouse in south Baghdad apparently used as a resistance gathering point. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In addition to bombing the area where the Black Hawk crashed, U.S. forces also destroyed three buildings in Tikrit that militants were suspected of using. "This is to remind the town that we have teeth and claws and we will use them," said Lt. Col. Steven Russell, who oversaw troops destroying two abandoned houses and a warehouse with machine gun and heavy weapons fire. Yep. I'd say our boys are kicking a little structural ass over there. Of course, it takes a keen military intellect to understand the strategic importance of blowing up empty buildings. Some people just don't get it: Several Iraqi guards from the Facility Protection Service, helping to guard the nearby US base, questioned the attack's effectiveness. "I don't see how this is going to work. People who really want to attack the Americans are not going to stop because a building has been destroyed," said one, who declined to give his name.