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 : GOPwinger Lie Debate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (345)	3/5/2004 7:24:50 PM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 403

A hard fact? >>>I'm no way convinced that the stalemate with Saddam was coincidental based on what was presumed happening on the public side, against that which was happening on the inside--whether it be the administration of the Republicans or Democratics. I think Iraq's oil was not wanted in the market (probably due to the Saudis or some other oil-like investments elsewhere) and the stalemate thus lasted through Bush to Clinton to Bush. Whether in the market or not, control of that oil can't be ignored. Thus, the eventual invasion. Whether recognized by all, the Lewinsky matter did have an effect on Clinton's policies of Iraq. It had an effect on those Washington politicians wanting to support the president through that time. It influenced what they publicly said, and much that got said was diversionary and reactionary of the times. Hence, your find of quotes from Democrats. Still, in the ultimate analysis this war--especially the manner in which it was waged and the false reasons given for its promulgation--is and was the least desireable recourse for the good of people. If improving the world is the objective, the Iraq War was the wrong way to go. Especially when one considers the international law which both Bush and Blair ignored. Bottom line? Bush didn't care much about people's lives. He cared only for those objectives that were both inside political and economical. This war enabled, first, a theme for his presidency (war president); second, it glossed over the manner by which he got (s)elected (the illigetimacy issue); third, it cloaked over a very bad economy (blame it on the war); and, fourth, it served to reward those who groomed him to become president (hello Halliburton, Enron, Carlyle, et. al). Here, meet some of the boys! hereinreality.com Fact is, they wouldn't have pulled that aircraft carrier stunt in the world of sincerity. That was mere campaign footage for what was thought to be an easy reelection in '04. Not so. Finally, if chaos in the Middle East was Bush's desired policy, well, he did accomplish that. Should Bush remain in power, expect things to get worse.<<< Message 19884973