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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (24181)	1/13/2004 3:23:07 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793682

<<....In the interview, Mr. Bush said removing Mr. Hussein from power was justified even without the recovery of any banned weapons.>> That is not the point. None of the arguments I've heard deals with the point. This is the point. <<DIANE SAWYER: (You) stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those weapons still —>> The presence of WMD with stateside delivery capability on hand or in the near pipeline is a slam-dunk, stand-alone, incontrovertible basis for attacking Iraq immediately. That rational would provoke in just about everyone a recognition that of course we need to attack. WMD in the offing, OTOH, may be part of a package of reasons that individually or together warrant an attack at some point in time. There is a huge, huge difference between a no-brainer justification for taking an extraordinary action and possibly contributing to a justification for that action. It boggles my mind that anyone cannot tell the difference between a no-brainer and a maybe, at least not once the difference has been enunciated. Not acknowledging the difference can only be attributed to either sheer stupidity or to a singlemindedness that cavalierly dismisses as noise any question or concern, IMO. Neither is desirable in a President. Surely the WH knew of this controversy. Surely they knew the question would be asked. There are ways of dealing with the controversy that could mitigate the outrage and mollify the outraged. A brush-off like "what's the difference?" gave the back of his hand to millions of citizens. Sheesh!