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 (182544)	2/13/2004 11:17:20 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1576823

He had no real reason not to comply, yet he refused to anyway. Forget the fact that it took an army at his doorstep, which is the one bush victory that he has managed to turn into political defeat, iraq did comply. The UN had inspectors in there and iraq was open to many more, which is what the UN wanted. Consider this incredible failure... following the very US intel leads that powell/rumsfled/cheney were touting as evidentiary fact in speech after speech, UNMOVIC inspectors reported that NOT ONE of these was panning out...they were being sent into factories covered in cobwebs, which had been visited repeatedly. Inspectors uncerimoniously were calling these leads a joke. This was not a secret you can say bush missed or about which intel failed him. It was open fact. You'd think bush would do a double take and ask his intel to explain why this was happening? Hell man, our side didn't want to hear this contrarian view...why?...obvious isn't it? We, on the other hand, had real concerns. So I guess you could try and slight Bush by calling it something simple-minded like a game of chicken, but I give him credit for handling the problem directly. Remember the PS at the bottom of my post. Your post leads to the conclusion above...I believe that the invasion was premeditated and deliberate. Hussein was doomed no matter the response. Al

To: brian1501 who wrote (182544)	2/13/2004 4:07:01 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1576823

Maybe it was a game of chicken for Hussein. He had no real reason not to comply, yet he refused to anyway. We, on the other hand, had real concerns. So I guess you could try and slight Bush by calling it something simple-minded like a game of chicken, but I give him credit for handling the problem directly. This is the part I don't understand why you don't see it. From the get go, I never thought Bush was playing a game of chicken. I knew it was a fait accompli. He planned to take out Saddam, one way or another. And O'Neill has confirmed that supposition. Again, Bush wanted to take out Saddam; that's why he is surrounded by people who agree with him. Birds of a feather........ Why do you refuse to see what finally some other Rep. are beginning to admit? This is not about partisanship......its calling a spade a spade. And its a very ugly spade at that. ted