SI
SI
discoversearch

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: carranza2 who wrote (147636)10/11/2004 4:46:02 PM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
I think that interpretation of data was marred both by exile testimony, which was biased to get us to deal with the regime, and by the difficulty of penetrating deeply into Iraq, so that Hussein's inclination to "keep 'em guessing" left the impression of substantial programs. In other words, as far as we knew, we were at least in the ballpark in concern over stockpiles. In that case, there is no bet, it is pretty much mandated to go, unless one truly trusts the inspection process, which the Administration didn't.

But yes, the beneficial effects of the invasion will last for a very long time.



To: carranza2 who wrote (147636)10/11/2004 5:46:42 PM
From: Don Hurst  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
>>"The WMD argument was essentially a good bet gone wrong, though the beneficial effects of the invasion will live on for a very long time."<<

Oh sure "the beneficial effects of the invasion will live on for a very long time"...yup, sure they will but should be difficult since those "beneficial effects" have been an abortion. Maybe we can invade Iran and give new life to those "beneficial effects".

Does it hurt when the blood gets to your brain?


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News