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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (7204)	2/23/2004 1:43:27 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Kerry would have at least worked through the UN to contain Iraq - much like Clinton did. Bush did try. Wrong, and this isn't even a point of debate. The Bush Administration stated that it would do the war alone if the UN did not approve. Thus, the US explicitly admitted that it did not submit to the UN. Tom

To: The Philosopher who wrote (7204)	2/23/2004 2:34:06 PM
From: Ron	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

That's a false comparison. It should be obvious by now that Bush's determination to invade Iraq had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction or 911 and everything to do with his own agenda, which was not the agenda of the American public. Getting Osama and el Queda was the priority of the American people. And the next presidential election will verify this. Of course, if the Bushies manage to pull Osama out of a hat at a convenient time, then the voters might overlook the Iraq mess, but I doubt it.