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: Orcastraiter who wrote (522301)	1/10/2004 9:38:34 PM
From: 10K a day	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

who cares about the blood dude. Nobody cares. Nobody cared before. Nobody cares now.

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (522301)	1/10/2004 11:48:02 PM
From: Rarebird	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

<Saddam may have had WMD> No evidence of ANY of this has EVER been found. The massive fall in the international value of the US Dollar since early 2002 is something that President Bush cannot do anything about. The real economic effects of such a massive fall in value of the US Dollar have yet to show up inside the continental US. They will.

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (522301)	1/11/2004 12:06:39 AM
From: hdl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

rouse ain't ruse

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (522301)	1/11/2004 11:25:16 AM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

Well, everything you said is bullsquat, but then you know that, and since you are as blind as a bat, I will fill you in. Firstly, Saddam may* have had WMD* yes, and he MAY have used them to kill thousands of Kurds...or did they just die of the thought of them? Here is a good breakdown on weapons supplied that says you are pretty much wrong. (do you ever tire of being wrong?) Message 19622650 The US gives aid to many countries. We gave aid to countries during clinto's regime that we will regret someday, that is nothing new. And how about ol Clark having a nice little get together with a pretty good despot....here is a blurb from the story: <font color=green> Clark has had extensive experience in the Balkans and ought to know something about capturing international war criminals. After all, the two most-wanted men in the world before Sept. 11, 2001, were Radovan Karadzic, the former president of the Bosnian Serbs, and Ratko Mladic, the head of the Bosnian Serb army. They are widely considered responsible for the worst atrocities in Europe since World War II, including the "ethnic cleansing" of Bosnia and Croatia, the murderous siege of Sarajevo, the slaughter of 7,000 unarmed boys and men in Srebrenica, and the systematic rape of thousands of Bosnian women and girls. Karadzic and Mladic were indicted in 1995 by the UN war-crimes tribunal, but their barbarity was common knowledge well before that. As far back as 1992 they were publicly identified by then-Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger as war-crimes suspects. So how did Clark, who claims he would have "had Osama bin Laden dead or alive two years ago," collar the two Serb butchers? Well, actually -- he didn't. Karadzic and Mladic are still at large. And yet it probably is fair to say that Clark knows more about dealing with war criminals than the rest of the Democratic field. After all, none of the other candidates has ever horsed around with a mass murderer. Clark has. On Aug. 27, 1994, when he was a three-star general working for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Clark paid a visit to Mladic in Bosnia. In so doing, The Washington Post reported, he "ignored State Department warnings not to meet with Serb officials suspected of ordering deaths of civilians." Clark says he wanted to get Mladic's views for a policy paper he was writing and thought he had permission to do so. Either way, Clark did more than take notes. The two men drank wine and posed for jovial pictures that showed them merrily wearing each other's caps. Mladic plied Clark with other gifts, too -- a bottle of brandy and a pistol inscribed "From General Mladic." It was like "Ike going to Berlin while the Germans were besieging Leningrad," one disgusted commentator wrote, "and having schnapps with Hermann Goering."</font> Are you on Clark's case about that??? If not, then you are just a carnival barker aiming one direction. By the time Bush was rattling the sabers of war, there was intelligence indicating that Saddam was not a threat, Oh yeah? that why all those Senators signed up to give President Bush authority??? Or are you going to cop a "Kerry" defense,(you can tell he is a Kennedy protege) and lie about it? You going to call Shillary and Billybubba liars too? and about 90% of the world that believed your brudder, Saddam, had WMD? Why don't you go tell the mothers and dads of the blown up Israelis how little of a threat Saddam was? And while you are at it, why not tell the remaining families of those stuffed in mass graves how great a guy your brudder was? news.bbc.co.uk Secondly, it's very likely that a quiet revolution could have occurred in Iraq Hard to believe anyone could make such an ignorant remark. Not even worth commenting on. Actually, the blood is on your hands together with the others that keep up the constant tirade against America and our troops while they are in harms way. Those in the military will remember how you did this, I will make damn sure of it. You and your buddy, DUHray, (remember his post of hatred towards our soldiers?), are making quite a legacy for yourselves.