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: goldworldnet who wrote (531687)	1/28/2004 7:45:51 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

You are wasting your time, Josh. Pitytime actually likes banging his head on his gong.

To: goldworldnet who wrote (531687)	1/28/2004 10:55:10 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

>>>I'm not all that concerned with the particulars. I know Saddam used WMD in the past<<< Back when Saddam was an ally of the US, the US didn't mind that he used the stuff against the Iranians. In fact, we gave him aid afterwards. Regarding gassing the Kurds I'm still confused about this, especially when I read the writing of a former CIA analyst and longtime US Army War College professor: homepages.vub.ac.be informationclearinghouse.info >>>he threw the UN inspectors out<<< Why do you folks keep spreading this lie? Clinton, in fact, pulled the weapons inspectors out when he resumed the bombing. Here's a comparative of the reporting on this issue based on how the respective networks reported the withdrawal in 1998 and how the respective networks reported in 2002 how the inspectors left. Clearly, in 2002, the media was reporting the Administration propaganda that "Saddam kicked out the inspectors." Fact of reality: He didn't! fair.org >>>and we worked with him for over a decade to no avail.<<< You know what? I'm not sure a sincere and serious attempt to work with him ever happened after the first Gulf War. I think, in reality, it was a stalemate: a) the US needed a bogeyman and Saddam was it; and, b) Saddam needed to prove his power in the region by standing up against the US. Both sides conflicted to the point where there really was no substantive work done to repair relations. However, throughout that period it's more than apparent now that the US weapons inspectors did a great job getting rid of the WMD. >>>I'm glad he's gone and his inviting inspectors back in when he saw the handwriting on the wall to play musical chairs changed nothing.<<< Well, I think all of us are glad he's gone. I don't know anyone contributing this this or other SI threads who favors dictators in power, including Saddam. Josh, you need to fully realize what happened here. There were two telltale events that happened to show that Saddam had no WMD. The first was when Saddam's son-in-law, Kamel Hussein, defected and told Western intelligence that Saddam was close to a nuclear program in the late 80s, and that he buried his WMD in the mid-90s... fair.org ...The US, whatever its motivation, decided only to publicize the nuclear aspect of Karmel, told them. They never publicized the WMD burial aspect to what he said... whitehouse.gov In fact, Josh, Hans Blix was in the process of analizing the site where Karmel said the materials were buried, but this never happened because Bush began the invasion as the UN and the US debated what tests to use in order to confirm Kamel's claims. >>>Iraq’s chief liaison officer to the UN inspection teams, General Hossam Amin, said yesterday that Iraq had begun to dig trenches in the areas it claims the weapons were destroyed. A UN team was due in Baghdad on 2 March to examine the sites and carry out soil tests, he said.<<< propagandamatrix.com smh.com.au