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: Orcastraiter who wrote (159385)	3/21/2005 11:04:34 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Once again, you manufacture my argument to your liking No manufacture. You cannot advocate rattling the sword - but don't use it, never use it! - and not deserve the name of an empty bluffer. But people can tell if you mean business, and all the empty threat will garner is a bluff that is called. If Saddam thought Bush was bluffing, they why did he comply? Saddam did not comply. The demand was that he release the scientists to leave the country, so they could answer the questions without fear of death for themselves and their families. The demand was to account for the stockpiles of WMDs which had previously existed. Saddam did not comply, even though by his own testimony, he didn't think Bush was bluffing. What he thought was that he could use the conflict between the US and France and Russia to get himself off the hook. His aim was to feign compliance, enough to get what would pass for an okay from Hans Blix, and force a US climbdown. With this bill of clean health, sanctions would have fallen away entirely, and Saddam could have paraded himself as the Great Arab Defier....and gone shopping. Had Saddam thought Bush was bluffing, he would have complied even less.