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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (188524)	5/13/2004 11:28:39 PM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575151

Tejek, RE: "Why was he detained for 13 days?" Gerlach asked." I have an issue with this statement. It conveys this Senator is out of touch with how this war has been extremely underfunded. Yahoo AP story said military people were working 18 hour days. If an American citizen is safely locked up, that's a better place for him or her, than naively wandering around in war-raging streets with a bullseye on his back. What would you do, if you had limited resources and you wanted to keep the guy safe, but you didn't want to reallocate your resources away from protecting your troops? I think this Congressperson is guilty of being out of touch with the resource constraints and lack of adequate funding of the war. Think of it this way: Berg was safe when he was in jail. But only a few days after being released, he was killed. Maybe the govt's error was in letting him out. I think his family is not showing their accountability for Berg's extremely poor decision to wander around in Iraq during the middle of a war, with white-colored skin, nearly blond hair, possibly blue eyes and climbing up communication towers during the night. What on earth was he thinking? Some common sense is in order. And some accountability for poor decision making. In a different post, you had said the govt is guilty for his murder. I have issue with that. I think the people who are guilty for his murder, are first and foremost the people who killed him. Our govt has exasperated the situation over there thru poor handling and they are at fault for that, but I don't think that makes our govt 100% at fault for this person's murder. The people who killed him, deserve the blame first and foremost. Regards, Amy J

To: tejek who wrote (188524)	5/14/2004 10:28:19 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575151

But Zarqawi's rise to the top didn't have to happen, according to a report aired by NBC news in early March. During a seven month period leading up to the invasion of Iraq, the US had at least three very good chances to kill Zarqawi while he was at a terrorist camp in northern Iraq. Although the Pentagon favored the attacks, the White House decided against going after Zarqawi for fear it would undercut its case for the war. Zarqawi's presence in Iraq was the only evidence of any kind that the Bush administration had to prove its claim that Al Qaeda and Iraq were working together. It is interesting that this place with no terrorist influence, we suddenly found out, was housing the leader of the new Al Qaeda.