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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. T. who wrote (636990)	10/3/2004 7:41:46 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

kerry said that by some counts there were 23 reason to kick saddam's ass out of Iraq. kerry said two of the main reasons turned out to be false. There were no stockpiles of WMD. That's the one or maybe two reasons kerry states change the entire equation and makes going into Iraq a mistake. After going into Iraq 300,000 were found in mass graves. And we also know now the saddam had totally corrupted the UN, Iraq oil for food program. And that means clearly Iraq now had extortion power over people and governments all over the world and billions in money or resources no one new he had. So to me there were 23 -2 +3 reason to kick saddam's ass out of Iraq. Now let us have kerry explain why with 24 reason to kick saddam's ass out of Iraq, doing it does not pass the kerry "global test"

To: E. T. who wrote (636990)	10/3/2004 8:35:16 AM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Message 20594664 I'm going to give all you kerry supporters a free history lesson... One that you need because you are too lazy to do it on your own.... japan.usembassy.gov "It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime," according to the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338). Representative Benjamin Gilman (Republican of New York) introduced H.R. 4655 September 29, 1998. President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law October 31, 1998. Gilman's bill passed in the House of Representatives on a 360-38 vote October 5, and the Senate approved H.R. 4655 by unanimous consent on October 7. Clinton signed the bill into law October 31. thomas.loc.gov@@@X 10/7/1998:Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.

To: E. T. who wrote (636990)	10/3/2004 9:05:20 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Your premise is erroneous: as far as anyone knew, we were threatened by Saddam Hussein. That was why Saddam was reluctant to work with the inspectors, and had to be threatened to make concessions, and that was why his accounting for stockpiles was inadequate. In other words, he acted as we would have expected given the intelligence analysis we were operating with. Every Western intelligence service thought he had stockpiles, including France and Germany. That was not the argument. The argument was the adequacy of "containment" to meet the threat. But, of course, the Administration's point was that any interface with terrorists that might lead to a hand off of WMDs superceded any calculation of danger through conventional use, and that we were the prime target of any such event. Thus, the extent of stockpiles has always been beside the point, and what was found after the war, which would be sufficient to reconstitute a program that could easily supply terrorists rapidly, is enough to underscore the danger. As for the relationship to Al Qaida: the contacts are there, we just do not know how far they went in cooperation.