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: Alighieri who wrote (194078)	7/11/2004 11:49:54 PM
From: brian1501	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577894

What should he have done? Once again, see South Africa for a sample of what TO do. What NOT to do would be don't run trucks out the back door when inspectors are waiting at the front, don't keep them waiting for hours "looking for the keys", don't complain about U2 overflights, don't complain that "palaces" should be off limits. You could go on... He was even allowing the inspectors to destroy his missiles as bush was pushing for war Sure, but were these declared in the first place? I don't recall. One thing he sure wasn't doing was showing the inspectors to his ongoing WMD programs and capabilities. He was in material breach all over the place. If he was sincere about cooperating, he would have volunteered these programs. He tried to hide them. Why do you keep defending this guy? Admit that he had WMDSs though he did not? The fact that he had them was never in question. Even France, Germany, and Russia believed he had them, they were just unwilling to do anything about it. What do you make of a president that mocks the presentation of McLaughlin in that same session and moves to war on ONE unsupported statement by Tenet? Bush during that session told Tenet that McLaughlin's presentation was garbage more or less. That Joe public would not buy it...boy, he sure bought it, didn't he? You are making a _tremendous_ leap here. There is no evidence (and the book absolutely did not try to make this case) that Bush based his war decision on that one "slam dunk" quote. You even correctly said above that Bush told Tenet to go get better proof. It's pretty clear that it follows that Bush was convinced later. In that same section of the book, Bush clearly told Tenet not to stretch anything to prove the case as well. Pretty different than your take. And where did the intel that supports cheney still today as he insists that saddam was reconstituting his nuclear programs come from? It came from MI5. Though later the CIA did not back it up. It was never in question where that information came from, just the validity of it. The 9/11 commission has completely discretited his assertions Interesting, the 9/11 commission investigating Iraq and it's WMD programs. Sounds a bit off topic, no? These guys are a bunch of sinister crooks. Considering none of your rebuttals are based on the contents of the Woodward book, I guess you'll agree with me then that the book (which was portrayed as a negative one by the press as hard as they could), really showed the administration in an overall positive light. Brian