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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: denizen48 who wrote (29969)	7/24/2005 8:11:27 PM
From: tsigprofit	Respond to of 361733

He may, or may not be - but he is the President of the US until January 2009 - and he is the one that would make that final decision. He would have many people helping him do it - but he must make those decisions in the event of a WMD attack on the US. Who else will make it? We should do nothing until February 2009? I was completely against Iraq - the invasion. And, I am against the continued occupation - because it does not work. It is not working or helping us be more secure. This is a different issue. >> 1. President Bush is not qualified intellectually to make such a decision for the world. Moreover, a guy who believes in the last days should be the last guy allowed to pull the nuclear trigger.