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.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: abstract who wrote (60695)	2/3/2004 5:22:30 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 65232

I think that Powell's statements were prudent. What Powell said & the headline are somewhat at odds. In any event, he clearly supported the decision to remove Saddam..... IMO, that is reasonable coming from the Secretary of State. The State Department's main mission is diplomacy. The State Dept was charged with attempting to get Iraq to peacefully comply via diplomacy. Powell admitted that Saddam would not have been contained, meaning that he believed that diplomacy would have failed in any event.... Powell: Arms doubts might have affected view on war But <font size=4>it was ultimately 'the right thing to do'<font size=3> Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said yesterday that he does not know whether he would have recommended an invasion of Iraq if he had been told it had no stockpiles of banned weapons, even as he offered a broad defense of the Bush administration's decision to go to war..... <font size=4> ....Powell<font size=3> came to the interview, held at The Washington Post, with an annotated and highlighted transcript, and <font size=4>suggested that Kay's testimony was more supportive of the administration than many news accounts have portrayed..... <font size=3> ..."Saddam Hussein and his regime clearly had the intent... That intent, Powell said, was also demonstrated by Hussein keeping in place the capability to produce weapons..... Iraq continued to have the "technical infrastructure, labs and facilities, that will lend themselves to the production of weapons of mass destruction." Such facilities "could produce such weapons at a moment in time, now or some future moment in time," Powell said. "I think there's evidence that suggests that he was keeping a warm base, that there was an intent on his part to have that capability.".... ...."If you look at my presentation from last year, I talk about intent," Powell said. "I talk about the capability I think is there, the stockpiles, but a large part of the presentation is also what happened" and the unanswered questions about Iraq's weapons holdings. "He got a chance to answer the questions and he didn't answer the questions.".... <font size=4> ....the international community wouldn't have kept them constrained.... "There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that if Iraq had gotten free of the constraints and if we had gone through another year of desultory action on the part of the United Nations and when they were freed without threat . . . they would have gone to the next level and reproduced these weapons.".... ...."I have confidence in the intelligence community," Powell said. "I've seen them do many things that were absolutely brilliant in their concept and their execution, many things we'll never be able to discuss and will never get a headline." With a twinkle in his eye, he added: "Very recently, as a matter of fact. Go research that if you wish.".... <font size=3> msnbc.msn.com