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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107347)	4/2/2005 8:32:31 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793822

Well, it's pretty clear you still wish to debate the justifications for the Iraq invasion. However, I didn't post it for debate; just laying a marker as to where I was in the long ago debate. I thought there were wmds and thought it was correct to wait for the inspections to establish their presence. However, it's self-evident now that not waiting for the inspection work to be completed was yet one more very large mistake the Bush folk made.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107347)	4/3/2005 4:10:29 AM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793822

This is a game that Saddam just played: 1. Iraq starts intimidating inspectors 2. Iraq kicks out inspectors. 3. Waits for the uproar at the UN Security Council 4. The United States threatens to take military action - Iraq tells them to FO 5. The United States threatens to send ground troops to the ME 6. Iraq allows limited inspections 7. Americans say not good enough and starts putting ground forces on ships to the ME 8. Iraq allows inspectors greater access 9. * Late Spring comes along (Summer is too hot to invade-Americans go back home) * cycle begins again. 1. Iraq starts intimidating inspectors 2. Iraq kicks inspectors out . . . * Bush (43) breaks the cycle here