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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: brian1501 who wrote (182539)	2/13/2004 9:04:34 AM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576880

>I'm not willing to bet lives on trusting Hussein like Ted is. So we bet lives on not trusting him, and we lost 500 of 'em (so far). -Z

To: brian1501 who wrote (182539)	2/13/2004 10:06:02 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576880

This is why you continue to miss the point. It wasn't up to us to prove anything. The burden of proof was on Hussein, and he failed to deliver. Year after year, and conflict after conflict. How many chances did you guys want to give him? 50? If I had a penny for each of the times I heard bush say that war was his last resort...i'd have a lot of pennies. What you are saying here is that this turned into little more than a game of macho-$hithead chicken, the price for which is now being paid by the boys/girls on the firing line there... Al PS: this is not my belief at all, BTW...

To: brian1501 who wrote (182539)	2/13/2004 11:24:15 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576880

Brian, re: It wasn't up to us to prove anything. The burden of proof was on Hussein, and he failed to deliver. Maybe, technically, but to the UN. And if you go that route then it was technically up to the UN to act on it's resolution. The burden of proof for a unilateral action, with the human, political and economic sacrifice this country has endured, was and is a higher threshold. 500+ kids, 10,000+ Iraqi civilians, when we were just plain wrong about the justification, is proof that the bar was set way too low. re: Having any question of the presence of WMD was unacceptable from a security standpoint, and Bush did his duty. That's a different discussion. John

To: brian1501 who wrote (182539)	2/13/2004 1:31:16 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576880

If it was because we couldn't prove the negative This is why you continue to miss the point. It wasn't up to us to prove anything. The burden of proof was on Hussein, and he failed to deliver. Year after year, and conflict after conflict. How many chances did you guys want to give him? 50? Actually, you miss the point. He did deliver but he didn't do it with grace or with chuckles like you all apparently expect he should have. We know he was in compliance because there are no WMD in Iraq. ted