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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (180183)	1/7/2004 12:22:25 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577019

So, did they account for the 2 million litres of chemical agent that had previously been known to exist but there was no evidence that it had been destroyed? Do you think you'd be asking the question if they had found even 2 million litres of bleach? This is, after all, what the war was about. You guys really need to settle on what the war was truly about... Al

To: i-node who wrote (180183)	1/8/2004 8:33:58 AM
From: Alighieri	Respond to of 1577019

US withdraws 400 weapon hunters from Iraq WASHINGTON - January 7 2003 The Bush administration has quietly withdrawn from Iraq a 400-member military team whose job was to scour the country for military equipment, according to senior government officials. The step was described by some military officials as a sign that the administration might have lowered its sights and no longer expected to uncover the caches of chemical and biological weapons that the White House cited as a principal reason for going to war last March. A separate military team that specializes in disposing of chemical and biological weapons remains part of the 1,400-member Iraq Survey Group, which has been searching Iraq for more that seven months at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. But that team is "still waiting for something to dispose of," said a survey group member. Some of the government officials said the most important evidence from the weapons hunt might be contained in a vast collection of seized Iraqi documents being stored in a secret military warehouse in Qatar. Only a small fraction have been translated. A report published Wednesday in The Washington Post cited a previously undisclosed document that suggested that Iraq might have destroyed its biological weapons as early as 1991. The report said investigators had otherwise found no evidence to support American beliefs that Iraq had maintained illicit weapons dating from the Persian Gulf war of 1991 or that it had advanced programs to build new ones. The report also documented a pattern of deceit that was found in every field of special weaponry. It said that according to Iraqi designers and foreign investigators, program managers exaggerated the results they could achieve, or even promised results they knew they could not accomplish — all in an effort to appease Saddam Hussein. In some cases, though, they simply did it to advance their careers, the report said, or preserve jobs or even conduct intrigues against their rivals. Senior intelligence officials acknowledged in recent days that the weapons hunters still had not found weapons or active programs, but in interviews, they said the search must continue to ensure that no hidden Iraqi weapons surfaced in a future attack. "We worry about what may have happened to those weapons," Stuart Cohen, the vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, said in an interview broadcast late Tuesday on the ABC News program "Nightline." "Theories abound as to what may have happened." The search for Iraqi weapons remains "the primary focus" of the survey group, a senior Defense Department official said. But he acknowledged that most of the dozens of new linguists and intelligence analysts to join the team had recently been given assignments related to combating the Iraqi insurgency rather than to the weapons search. David Kay, the head of the survey group, made it known last month that he might leave his post. Government officials said Wednesday that he had not reached a decision but that both he and his top deputy, Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton of the Defense Intelligence Agency, were in Washington, in part to discuss what direction the hunt should take. "I am sure that if they had found important evidence, we would know about it," said Representative Jane Harman of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who has said the administration exaggerated the Iraqi threat. Bill Harlow, the top spokesman for the Central Intelligence Agency, said Wednesday that "the team needs to compete its work, and no one should jump to any conclusions before it has an opportunity to examine all of the circumstances." American intelligence officials who described the seized documents said they hoped the documents might eventually help to unravel the mystery of whether Iraqi weapons remained hidden or whether they were destroyed long before what the Bush administration initially portrayed as a mission "to disarm Iraq."

To: i-node who wrote (180183)	1/8/2004 10:08:03 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1577019

Several posts back you insisted that there was an al Qaeda link and that the Left was without morals when attacking Bush on this issue. It took Powell today to admit there was no connection. Really.........I wonder how you sleep at nite. We know Bush isn't smart enough to be affected.

To: i-node who wrote (180183)	1/10/2004 9:26:12 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577019

David, re: So, did they account for the 2 million litres of chemical agent that had previously been known to exist but there was no evidence that it had been destroyed? This is, after all, what the war was about. Seriously. If you believed that was what the war was about, then you need to watch 60 minutes tomorrow. If you believe what you hear, that Bush was planning on attacking Iraq shortly after he took office, before 9/11, then don't you have to adjust your thinking? I think you could be a person of principle, not a pawn of the political parties and talk show personalities. Let me know what you think when/if you watch. John