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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (48506)	9/15/2004 11:31:42 AM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Saddam being a bad guy is not the issue. The real questions are: 1) Was Saddam involved in 9/11? No. 2) Was taking Saddam out worth the cost? $200+ Billion and counting 1017 American lives and counting 10,000+ American wounded and counting 10s of thousands of Iraqis dead and wounded and counting more terrorists and more terrorism. Worth the cost is the question. The answer is NO.

To: Proud_Infidel who wrote (48506)	9/15/2004 12:37:27 PM
From: techguerrilla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

I didn't support Hussein ... but $200 billion to unseat? ... .......... and make the US more vulnerable to domestic attack? He was a dangerous man. No doubt. Clearly, he was paying families of Palestinian suicide bombers targeting Israel. But we can't solve all the world's problems, especially when our own economy is falling apart. The Iraq invasion did not have a terrorism premise. It was for twisted purposes. Maybe legitimate. But wrong time. We still needed to finish the job in Afghanistan. That job went undone. The Taliban is resurfacing, Osama is living comfortably in Pakistan, and the poppy fields are flourishing again in the region. /john