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 (36469)	6/13/2005 7:54:55 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 90947

Mistake....that's a judgment made with the benefit of hindsight....I really don't see how Bush had a choice given the backdrop to 9/11....and you can be sure that had he not gone in and something bad had happened, the same fools who are pointing to flaws in the intel now would be pointing to positive signs (and there were many) and saying Bush had screwed up. The evaluation of intel is a tricky game. I'd rather have had a mistake on the side of caution than the other way around. And remember, while the Iraq Survey Group failed to find any stockpiles of WMD there was ample evidence that Saddam had forbidden materials, had not renounced his nuclear ambitions and had a plan in place to lift the sanctions so that he could restart his nuke program. Moreover, Iraq was harboring terrorists, Salman Pak was used to train terrorists and Saddam bragged about his monetary subsidies to homicide bombers in Israel and the occupied territories. In all, it was not an unjustified decision. J.