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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (148284)	10/20/2004 11:50:18 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Neo....the bottom line (which Bush hating morons will never accept) is that based upon the intel we possessed (even though mixed), specific warnings the Admin had rec'd, foreign intel which was shared with the Admin. and Saddam's suspicious behavior and sworn emnity toward the US, leaving Saddam in place was a risk no President could logically take in view of 9/11. If he had not acted and something happened, he would have been impeached....and I would have been one of the first to call for it.... Those ARE the relevant facts. JLA

To: Neocon who wrote (148284)	10/20/2004 1:27:07 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You are quoting a report from 2002, with quotes from "Charlie" whose latest report repudiates virtually all claims he once made. He's an insider or would not have been placed in the public eye in 2002 and now in 2004. Why should anything he has to say have any weight here and now? Why should we put any faith in circumstantial evidence as arranged by Bush admin insiders? Is he a nuclear expert? No. Is Dr. Wood? Yes. Current evidence continues to support the claim that Bush asked for specific data to justify invasion and they manufactured a case, custom built.