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: GST who wrote (122210)	12/27/2003 12:36:57 PM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

For the life of me, I do not understand why so many otherwise bright, intelligent people waste their time on you.

To: GST who wrote (122210)	12/27/2003 12:39:03 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Now you are saying there was no direct threat to the United States? Actually, that's been my position all along... Anything else you might believe about my perspective is a figment of your own imagination.. Iraq was a indirect threat to the US (support for terrorism), and a DIRECT THREAT to our allies and interests (oil and regional stability). Now, we may very well find that Iraq was a direct threat to the US, if Douglas Feith's reports eventually are publicly confirmed about the role Iraq played in supporting Al-Qaeda. Nadine has stated that Iraq was a direct threat to the US -- and GWBush said it every fifteen minutes while marketing the war. Your "saying so" doesn't make it true.. Please show references and documentable links to such language... And I'll bet you'll find that they were referring either to indirect threats, or direct threats to US interests in the region.. (or POTENTIAL direct terrorist threats to the US in the future). Hawk