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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (131503)	5/5/2004 11:14:22 AM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 281500

It was two weeks after the event. These things take time. That wasn't the particular point I was making. I was making the point that Hawkmoon's memory was selective. But your point that an "apology" takes time is more than reasonable. I accept that without question or any criticism towards Bush. Here is a headline from today. What's the difference really? 1. Did you see the word "apology" in there? Perhaps he did, but as the story reads, he disassociated the US from the incident rather than give an apology. 2. Clinton made that particular apology, in person, face to face, mano et mano. Those are differences as I see them. At this moment, I don't level any particular criticism [with respect to an apology], but those are differences which some people may see as substantive. In truth, it doesn't matter what US people think is an "apology". Irrespective of the words used, the question is whether the Iraqis see it as an acceptable apology. jttmab