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 : World Affairs Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3129)	1/4/2004 7:51:24 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3959

Hawk, after the "imminent threat" episode based on the intercepted communication between Iraqi officials that Colin Powell presented to the U.N., I would say that this time the US and UK should be wiser. Interesting to see if Blair would act in cohort with Bush in the case of Libya. When Powell presented proof of Iraq's WMD possession and the US military marched into Iraq, the US had to eat crow when they failed to get any WMD there. In the case of Libya, even if they intercepted the ship, they need to stand back and as a first step allow the IAEA to do their task. I would hope that in the case of Libya, there would not be any theories regarding the collusion of France, Germany and Russia as has been done in the case of Iraq. My feel is that they will not find anything significant in Libya. In the end, Col. Gadaffi would get the embargo against Libya lifted. I conclude so because we know that WMDs could be destroyed and disposed off very quickly without a trace. He probably would use Chad to do so. And in the case of nuclear weapons, how many desert scientists have the brains to do any significant research in nuclear science?