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: GST who wrote (140892)	7/19/2004 4:23:32 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

This is beside the point -- neither Bush nor Blair claimed that Iraq posed a "clear, present and imminent threat on the basis of existing weapons of mass destruction." They both claimed that Saddam was working on WMD programs, would never give them up, and it was suicidal to wait until he actually deployed them because by then it would be too late.

To: GST who wrote (140892)	7/19/2004 4:27:46 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So? Kay is entitled to his opinion. BUT the point is that Bush has clearly stated....post 9/11 we are not going to wait for threats to become imminent.....SH was obviously a threat which was not going to go away absent his removal....his removal is now accomplished....and as Kay discovered SH retained technology and materiel that he was forbidden to have.....his malevolent intentions could not be clearer.....there was a reason SH did not cooperate and acted so guilty....he was....