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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeff Jordan who wrote (281639)	3/29/2004 2:11:28 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

No country will standby and be attacked and do nothing. Ok, I'll bite: when was the last time Iraq attacked the USA?

To: Jeff Jordan who wrote (281639)	3/29/2004 2:13:25 PM
From: Bid Buster	Respond to of 436258

The U.N. did do something..only stoopid wingers think they didn't

To: Jeff Jordan who wrote (281639)	3/29/2004 2:28:33 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Given that Saddam did not have any weapons, was not at threat to the US or anyone else it would seem to me the UN did do something (the inspectors were doing their jobs) and the US just plain fucked up on 1) security grounds 2) diplomatic grounds 3) monetarily 4) time cost/ we should have been going after Al Qaeda instead of this thug In short, we wasted lives, spent over $300B we did not have, increased the threat of terrorism in the process (ask Spain), failed to address the root cause of terrorsim, did the work of Bin Laden for him (he did not like Hussein and want him removed), and totally blew sky high the goodwill of the world towards the US after 911 to go after someone who was never a threat to the US instead of concentrating on the threat to the US. This mission in Iraq could not possibly have gone worse for the US or better for Bin Laden. Mish