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: jlallen who wrote (529662)	1/26/2004 11:01:42 AM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 769670

No, the issue is the murderous results of the West's negligent abandonment of colonization of the Islamic world after WWII, in favor of the myth of "self determination". With the possible exception of culturally-failed France, the entire West is moving rapidly to follow America's lead in rectifying the folly of post WWII de-colonization...

To: jlallen who wrote (529662)	1/26/2004 11:24:22 AM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

>>> Given Saddam's history of aggression, desire to dominate the region and proximity to the world oil spigot....that's not an issue either....<<< Let's examine what you wrote: 1) History of aggression Yes, Iraq waged a war against Iran which both the US and Kuwait supported. Kuwait did not want to be next, it didn't want to become a religious-styled fundamentalist government. The US wanted payback for what Iran did to the US. Yes, Iraq was wrong to invade Kuwait. But it's not like Iraq didn't consult the US before doing so (see April Glaspie meeting with Saddam). More importantly, most of the world was on board in opposing Saddam's invasion into Kuwait. Conversely, most of the world opposed the US invasion of Iraq. 2) Iraq's desire to dominate the region Every Arab nation was on record as opposing the US invasion. The Arab League repeatedly noted it did not fear Saddam. That Saddam held delusions of grandeur, ala New Age Saladin, was pretty much an Iraqi in-house thing. There was no threat to the region, especially in the aftermath of the first Gulf War. 3) The oil spigot OK, so you agree that it's okay for America to invade the sovereignty of another nation in order to grab its oil.

To: jlallen who wrote (529662)	1/26/2004 11:24:37 AM
From: Keith Fauci	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

The only thing coming out of the Democrats mouths is sophistic drivel. According to the latest information the Iraqi scientists were giving Saddam Hussein phony reports as to the level and progress of many W. M.D. projects. They reported that many of the projects were in process in order to collect money from the dictator. My question is this- how were the United Nations, CIA, President Clinton and then President Bush to know that these W. M.D. projects were not in process, when even Saddam Hussein was fooled by the scientists in charge of them. Why should President Bush be blamed for misleading the American public when he was doing his duty as commander-in-chief trying to protect our country from the spread of these weapons. And what happened to the weapons that the world knows he did have? According to defectors and Israeli intelligence services they are buried in the Becca Valley in Syria. I think it is time we go get them.