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: SilentZ who wrote (199919)	9/3/2004 10:09:36 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573849

>> But in the case of Iraq, our national security was not! Okay, you're following the liberal line, so there is no end to this. Anyone with half a brain can see that Saddam presented a national security risk. You can debate about how big a risk, but we were having our pilots shot at on a daily basis. Saddam was refusing access to weapons inspectors which was a condition of the ceasefire under which we were operating. We were aware of his prior use of WMD, there was no evidence (and still is) of his having destroyed some 1 million liters of chemical agent he was required to destroy. He had attempted the assassination of a former president. We certainly had credible intelligence to SUGGEST that he might be redeveloping nuclear weapons. And he was looking pretty guilty. You may not consider that to be a significant national security risk. I do. Most Americans do. I think there are a naive few who think that Saddam meant us no harm and wanted to be our friend if we would just be nice to him. But most people understand it isn't that simple. You don't just "kiss and make up" with a Saddam.