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 : Fahrenheit 9/11: Michael Moore's Masterpiece -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quehubo who wrote (763)	6/27/2004 8:28:24 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2772

You will recall Saddam got mixed signal from the US on Kuwait. The US choosing to declare war on Iraq because of Kuwait, is not Saddam attacking the US. It is the US attacking Saddam because we did not approve of what he was doing. If planes were flying over our airspace and continually bombing our country, we might be tempted to fire back on them too. Do you know how many planes were hit in flying those missions? Do you know how many tons of explosives we dumped on Iraq? You might want to check out those numbers. Sponsoring terrorism in Israel is NOT going against America. The eliding of American and Israeli issues is TOO stupid. What if Saddam sponsored terror in Iran (which he did, and we approved of it) and killed some Americans- would that make that act of terrorism against Iran really an act against America? No, of course it wouldn't. Saddam didn't "hold" terrorists in his country. The Saudis and Iranians and Paskistanis have had far greater contacts with terrorists than Saddam and his government. It is unclear whether he really had any real agreements with Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda, after all, considered him an infidel. Saddam developed WMDs (like many other countries, including the US) and used them in the war he fought with Iran (which, if you will recall, our country approved of). Using WMDs did not prevent Rummy from kissing the man (smooch). On WMDs: In late 1983 and early 1984, Donald Rumsfeld flew twice to Baghdad, meeting with Saddam Hussein and his foreign minister, Tariq Aziz, in order to seek closer ties. This was the period when Iraq was using poison gas in its war against Iran, provoking international protests. In March 1984, Washington publicly condemned the use of chemical weapons, while maintaining its strategic support for the Saddam Hussein regime and blaming Iran for the conflict.

To: quehubo who wrote (763)	6/27/2004 8:45:29 PM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2772

Do you recall the Americans who died getting him out of Kuwait? Yes, but why were we so concerned about Saddam invading Kuwait? Did we show the same concern when China invaded Tibet, or when Indonesia invaded East Timor? Hell no. Also, any astute observer could see that Saddam was intending to invade Kuwait. His threats and troop build ups prior to the invasion were well known. Why didn't we stop him then, like the British did in the early 1970s when Iraq threatened an invasion of Kuwait? How about the firing at Americans in no fly zones? The "no fly zones" were never sanction by the UN. They were illegally imposed by the U.S. and British. Perhaps he fired at us, but we had no legal authority setting them up in the first place. Trying to assassinate President Bush? Not sure if that was ever proven true. I thought that story was retracted. Sponsoring terrorism is Israel which kills Americans. Bingo! That is one dastardly deed that Saddam did that deserved some retribution. But, while we're at it, perhaps we could force our friends Isreal to make peace with the Palestinians, by withholding our immense financial support. Holding terrorists in country Abu Nidal? Another fair criticism of the Butcher of Baghdad. But, then again, we don't just invade every country that's holding a terrorist. Having a terror training center for hijacking planes. Haven't heard that one. Developing WMD and using them. His WMDs were destroyed, as the post war searches have demonstrated. As far as attacking countries that have developed WMDs, N. Korea should be a lot higher on our list than Iraq. Attacking two oil producing nations and threatening to attack another Saudia Arabia. Those threats against SA were never substantiated. The U.S. lied about satelitte photos showing Iraqi troops ready to invade SA. When asked to show the evidence, the U.S. caved. I guess oil is our real concern when it comes to Saddam after all. Obviously the French did not care, they were busy subverting UN sanctions by taking bribes from Saddam. Geez if Saddam did not get the support of the French and Germans we would never have had to take him out. A lot of western powers are guilty of befriending Saddam. The French probably do so out of spite for the U.S.