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: KyrosL who wrote (136366)	6/12/2004 1:04:50 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

General granted latitude at Abu Ghraib prison msnbc.msn.com

To: KyrosL who wrote (136366)	6/12/2004 1:16:10 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

C2, you meticulously peruse the article about "tags", while you are silent when it comes to the key issue here: the fact that these known UN-monitored WMD sites containing dangerous WMD materials were left unguarded by the US army, and looted at leisure over a number of weeks after the fall of Baghdad If you read over my posts, you'll know that I agree with the fact that the postwar planning was horrible. I make no apologies for it. But the larger point, if you follow the discussion, was WMD as a justification for the war, i.e., support for the war if we knew what we "know now." In that sense, the postwar failures are irrelevant, though they clearly do exist. I do not minimize them. I think, however, that a bit of time and a broader perspective will put the post war failures in their appropriate place. The issue under discussion in this thread of posts has been WMD as the justification for the war. The elephant in the bedroom is my way of describing the potential for Saddam to have purchased nukes on the black market as one of the reasons for the war. I call the elephant in the bedroom because no one cares to see it or discuss it. The NYT article is simply a smaller part of the overall discussion. The article deals with recent WMD findings, what has been found, how it was found, whether it was known to have existed previously, etc. The point was made that it was all tagged, hence irrelevant. But that is clearly not what the article said nor implied. I don't mind discussing this stuff with anyone who is interested in a dialogue. It's imperative, however, to know what the issue under discussion is since I do put some time and care into what I post and I don't want to waste time by repeating myself.

To: KyrosL who wrote (136366)	6/12/2004 1:45:01 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hope springs eternal, as the saying goes. Many conservatives continue to hope that significant stockpiles of WMD will be found in Iraq. Others continue to believe that significant stockpiles have already been found in Iraq, but the liberal media refuses to report it. If you read the type of news outlet that FL banned here, you'd believe that it's an established fact that Saddam was behind 9/11, that tons of CBW were smuggled into Syria before the war, etc. If you don't believe that, then you're an example of people who are brainwashed by liberal media bias. The thing I found most disturbing about the small percentage of Americans who believe various conventional news outlets, be it the NYTimes or Fox, is that I fear a very large percentage of them believe what they read on the conspiracy sites. I am sure far more do that we'd like to admit. A very large percentage of them post on SI.