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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (12081)	4/3/2004 6:09:04 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 81568

QUESTIONS FOR HANS BLIX: What Weapons? nytimes.com [ This dry take was in the NYT magazine last week. I agree with you about the fundamental dishonesty of the "nukes = biological weapons = old chemical junk" WMD formulation. But then, everything W's crew did running up to the war had more to do with starting a war, regardless, than with anything else. ] nterview by DEBORAH SOLOMON Q Your new book, ''Disarming Iraq,'' recounts your futile search for weapons as the former chief United Nations weapons inspector. Yes, President Bush and Tony Blair were convinced there was something there. They were convinced there were witches. You yourself initially believed there were weapons! Only later did you change your mind. Yes, I, too, believed there were weapons. I began to be skeptical when we went to sites that were given to us by U.S. intelligence and we found nothing. They said this is the best intelligence we have, and I said, if this is the best, what is the rest? Anyway, Saddam Hussein is a kind of witch, isn't he? No, he is Satan himself! Evil personified. You never even met him. He considered it far below his dignity to meet any sort of lowly creatures like international inspectors. Can one say the same of certain leaders in democratic countries? Wasn't Vice President Cheney equally dismissive of you? The Pentagon and Cheney have been very negative toward inspections. Cheney said inspections are useless at best. How many times did you meet with him? Just once. We were invited in to see Bush, and somewhat to my surprise, we were taken in to see Cheney first. We had no note takers. It was not offered to us. And then you met with the president in the Oval Office? It didn't look oval to me at the time, but I didn't pay much attention. It was Colin Powell, Cheney and Bush and others -- and a note taker! They had one on their side, and we had none on ours! Couldn't you just have jotted down a few notes in a pad? It's not the decorum when you meet a president. You have to concentrate on the conversation. What was Bush like? He made on me a boyish impression. He was agile, moving, moving in the chair, especially compared to Cheney. Who, I suppose, seems more wooden. Yes, the rumors that Cheney is alive are somewhat exaggerated. It's Mark Twain in reverse. I assume you're referring to Twain's comment that the rumors of his death were greatly exaggerated. Did President Bush seem supportive of your belief in weapons inspection? Yes, but I never thought that Bush would have such short patience as three and a half months. It was clearly not reasonable to break off the inspections when he did. What do you think of John Kerry? I welcome his attitude toward multilateral cooperation. I think he is trying to get back to the traditional U.S. attitudes. What do you make of the presidential race? I think maybe we foreigners should have the right to vote in your next election, since we are so dependent on you. Do you like the phrase ''weapons of mass destruction''? It is a very poor phrase, because it lumps together chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, which are very different. About 35 to 40 countries have chemical weapons. If you just take nuclear, you have 8 -- plus 2. By plus 2, you mean Iran and North Korea, who may or may not have them. Have we made the world safer by removing Hussein? No. It doesn't look that way. I find you salty in conversation, but your book is somewhat dry. Perhaps it could have been colorful. But my attitude is one of understatement. In Sweden, we have a strong civil service tradition. I think we are even-tempered and patient. Diplomacy needs patience. Isn't your wife a diplomat? She is retired, but she was an ambassador in charge of Arctic and Antarctic issues. Are there any nuclear weapons in Antarctica? Not that I can see. You never see any nuclear weapons! Perhaps they're buried under the snow. Or perhaps you are blind. Or bland. Do you know the saying that diplomacy is the bland leading the bland?

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (12081)	4/4/2004 8:35:23 AM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

calculatedRisk. You said....." This is one of the blunders of the Bush administration: they conflated nuclear weapons with mustard gas. Blix is referring to mustard gas, anthrax and some other biological / chemical weapons. What weapons did sadam use to murder thousands of his countrymen? We had a small taste of what anthrax can do. And the most dangerous of all...biological weapons. Just how much of this stuff is needed to murder thousands of innocent people? A test tube full? maybe a gym bag? how much is dangerous to the USA and other free countries. As you said...." Blix is referring to mustard gas, anthrax and some other biological / chemical weapons."..... Blix and the UN and the rest of the world thought these things are there and may still be there. How would you feel if a islam terrorist got hold of some biological stuff and released it in your city. Should a president of the USA just put the threat of terrorists using biological weapons on a likely % basis. Only 10 % should we do something? how about 20 %. maybe 50 % should be the take action mark? Sept. 11 should have proven to all Americans and all of the free world that islam terrorists will use whatever weapon they can get their hands on...what ever will murder the maximum amount of innocent people. so far it has been explosives BUT what IF. IMO the president of the USA took the right action in disrupting the middle East. Changes for the better have already resulted in the middle east. Although at times I feel that the loss of just one American or innocent life by going after these islam terrorists scum is to big a price to pay. This President made the most unpopular choice by going after islam terrorists where they live but the job of an American President is to protect Americans FIRST. If it means losing his/her job...so be it. I find it strange beyond belief that democrats would use as an excuse the actions of their own president who was trying to protect American lives as a political argument to gain office. I understand there is NO convincing fanatic democrats and others.