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 (154555)	12/21/2004 5:32:10 AM
From: RMF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

When Bush massed troops in Kuwait the inspectors had MORE leeway to evaluate the Iraqi threat than they had had in the previous 12 years. Instead of risking those troops in a VERY risky venture that Bush's own Father had delineated earlier, THIS administration went ahead based on faulty intelligence and presuppositions. BOTH administration were seriously deficient in not establishing better "on the ground intelligence", but THIS administration is the one that actually sent our people into harm's way. I find it amazing that so many Bush suporters "suddenly" find the Clinton administration SO brilliant when they are looking for scapegoats to explain their mistakes. Too bad they don't look to the brilliance of the Clinton administration when it comes to DEFICITS!!!!!!

To: Neocon who wrote (154555)	12/26/2004 12:50:56 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

the difference between the clinton and bush policies are stark and clear -- clinton promoted regime change as a desirable goal -- bush decided that the usa has the right to invade iraq [or any other country as we see fit] and impose a government and a political process. bush engaged in unilateral regime change as the cornerstone of usa policy. the policies pursued by bush and clinton sit at opposite ends of the spectrum of possible actions. we are paying the price for this radical change in foreign policy. the contribution of the necons is primarily one of arrogance -- according oursleves supreme power status and the right to do as we choose without the impediment of consideration of legitimacy, other than the legitimacy we derive from military supremecy. this policy has already failed, and the consequenses grow worse for us, and worse for the world in which we live.