SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Neocon who wrote (504032)12/5/2003 10:20:11 AM
From: PartyTime  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Why is it that the US, and the UN under pressure from the US, took as gospel Saddam Hussein's son-in-law's mid-90s statement that Iraq had a nuclear program, but completely ignored or dismissed his statement that Iraq had destroyed and buried all of its WMD?

In fact, it was this burial site where the purpported WMD burial took place that Hans Blix was in the process of inspecting but couldn't because Bush decided to turn the so-called Coalition of the Willing into a Coalition of the Killing.



To: Neocon who wrote (504032)12/5/2003 10:24:26 AM
From: TigerPaw  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
when push came to shove, we should not be forced into Saddam's timetable,

Instead we were forced into Karl Rove's timetable, which was to scare the bejesus out of the public in time for congressional elections. Saddam's timetable was to wait forever since he was in no position to control events.

TP



To: Neocon who wrote (504032)12/5/2003 10:29:54 AM
From: CYBERKEN  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
The key to revisionism is that it matters not what was said, but what is said about what was said.

The general ability and willingness of Americans to use their ears has declined faster than our culture in general. Perhaps the New American Renaissance will also involve the free distribution of hearing aides...



To: Neocon who wrote (504032)12/5/2003 1:28:37 PM
From: J_F_Shepard  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
If you disavowed the idea of imminent risk, why was it necessary to "follow Saddam's timetable" and fight in the heat of the summer....why couldn't we have waited until Fall??? In other words, someone thought the risk was imminent or there were other reasons for going to war.....I believe the Bushies had the latter.