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: i-node who wrote (206146)	10/12/2004 1:14:56 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576160

Kerry would not act without UN approval. And UN approval would not be granted for preemption. And that is fundamentally, ethically right. Al

To: i-node who wrote (206146)	10/12/2004 3:52:23 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576160

Kerry has already said he would not have taken us to war without the approval of the UN. That seems to me to be the end of the story. Kerry would not have gone to war in Iraq because the UN didn't approve. I don'think it can be made simpler. Yes, it can.........he said he would not have gone to war unilaterally. There is a huge difference between what he said and what you allege. I've said it before.......GOP spin will be your downfall.

To: i-node who wrote (206146)	10/13/2004 4:02:52 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576160

The pre-emptive nature of the Iraq War is precisely what many on the Left have made the centerpiece of their complaint. Forget whether they are on the Left, Right or Middle, but I think you are missing the reason some people object to the 2nd Iraq war (which ended long ago). It is not solely because the war was pre-emptive; rather, the objectors believe the threat posed by Saddam did not justify a pre-emptive war. In hindsight, they appear to have been correct. And I repeat, any President that can convince himself there is a serious threat to the US will remove that threat, regardless of what the UN thinks. Objections to George in this regard rest mainly on his low bar for determining what constitutes a threat.