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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: trouthead who wrote (27213)	1/20/2005 10:47:58 AM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 90947

Clinton invade Bosnia because they broke ONE UN resolution, Saddam broke SEVENTEEN.

To: trouthead who wrote (27213)	1/20/2005 10:48:05 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

It was not our responsibility to make SH comply....it was his obligation to do so....he was given every opportunity..... J.

To: trouthead who wrote (27213)	1/20/2005 11:34:04 AM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Actually, Clinton attacked Iraq several times using (probably) thousands of bombs and cruise missiles during his Administration, and (if I remember correctly) had ground troops in the process of shipping out to attack Iraq twice. All in an effort to get Saddam to comply to UN resolutions. Further, Clinton passed a law through Congress making the removal of Saddam from power the Official Policy of the United States of America - and yes I believe Senator Kerry voted for it. Other than an invasion, how much more can you turn up the heat more than that? The U.S. was attacked on 9-11 (close enough to New Jersey?) in large part because U.S. troops were stationed in Saudi Arabia. Why were U.S. troops stationed in Saudi Arabia since the first Gulf War? U.S. troops were in Saudi Arabia to enforce UN Sanctions regarding IRAQ. re: "Why not continue to turn up the heat if Saddam was not a threat to attack the US"