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: Lazarus_Long who wrote (36416)	6/12/2005 12:16:32 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Sorry..we have to disagee....I find no fault w/GWB thus far...

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (36416)	6/12/2005 2:05:57 PM
From: SiouxPal	Respond to of 90947

The Post 'O The Day here IMO.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (36416)	6/12/2005 6:38:46 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

"...very likely will have to go back in following an attack on the US by Iraqi terrorists or a hostage situation like the Iranian one." You might want to revisit your prophesy. If the US leaves now the resulting government will most certainly be of the extreme nature you describe. I don't want to minimize the seriousness of 'Iraqi terrorists or a hostage crisis'. However, such a government will build the most well funded and resourced military the world has ever been able to produce. The top priority for us will not be suicide bombers, it will be dealing with a well equiped super power enemy.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (36416)	6/13/2005 3:00:19 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Laz, we had been dealing with Saddam's BS for a decade before we first learned that NK had been secretly violating the agreement with us. We had been in essentially a shooting war with Saddam for years in the "no fly zones". In order to protect those whom Saddam would otherwise slaughter, we already had a significant presence in & around Iraq. Every single intelligence agency, including the UN all believed that Saddam had "stockpiles" of unaccounted for WMD's, ET AL. Remember, it was a "slam dunk". The UN, as usual had utterly failed to deal with Saddam, NK, or any other rouge regime on the planet, leaving us stretched woefully thin (thanks Clinton) to deal with every pressing matter. And there are a number of other strategic reasons why we needed to deal directly & forcibly with Saddam first. Many of which I'm sure we will never be privy to.