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: American Spirit who wrote (44980)	10/24/2005 10:17:30 AM
From: redfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362466

Menace to whom? Certainly not to you or me. Don't feed me talking points ... explain why Saddam was a menace to the U.S.

To: American Spirit who wrote (44980)	10/24/2005 10:28:53 AM
From: twmoore	Respond to of 362466

Saddam was a menace. He needed to be disarmed, basically frisked thoroughly and kept in a tight box until we could replace him somehow. Bush rushed right in without a plan. Why do you think that Saddam was a menace?He was basically powerless after the first Gulf War and a threat to no one.He had NO planes left and his troops were in tatters. America could have had him removed from power by covert means,without any loss of young American soldiers lives. What a waste!

To: American Spirit who wrote (44980)	10/24/2005 10:30:56 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362466

Bullshit. I'm with Red again. Not a threat. Country totally falling apart, altho it looks like paradise compared to now. Things were so bad pre-war that the hospitals had to use gasoline to sterilize stuff; chlorine was embargoed. Not a threat to anybody.

To: American Spirit who wrote (44980)	10/24/2005 10:31:37 AM
From: T L Comiskey	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 362466

'Of course there is collateral damage, as there is in any war. Tragic but true.' Saddam was in a box.. I attended a lecture by Anthony Zinni 40,000 sorties by 'allied' air command....pre war not One shoot down....by Iraqi forces Not One..... Saddam was No Threat NO THREAT.. save your.. 'collateral damage' bullshit for the neocon threads I find murder..by any other name.. Disgusting.. T

To: American Spirit who wrote (44980)	10/24/2005 12:39:57 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362466

Saddam was a menace. He needed to be disarmed Saddam was on the same path that Qaddafi was on in Libya. He wanted to rehabilitate his relationships, get sanctions removed, and get on with the business of being rich. He could easily have been engaged on that basis and saved a few hundred thousand lives. TP

To: American Spirit who wrote (44980)	10/24/2005 3:50:32 PM
From: ThirdEye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362466

Saddam was a menace. He needed to be disarmed, basically frisked thoroughly and kept in a tight box until we could replace him somehow. What is that, a quote from Douglas Feith? Richard Pearle? That is such BS. This country has sided with so many brutal dictators in the past for political expediency that your rationale for repacing Saddam is no more than an attempt to whitewash Kerry's record or salve your own conscience. We supported or tolerated Samosa, Pinochet, Papa Doc, Noriega, Battista, Stroesner in Paraguay and plenty of other creeps in L.A. We played ball with Nasser, Assad, the democratic and benevolent royal House of Saud, China, Indonesia. The only thing that drives us to war is whether it's good for business. And when it's bad for business, we don't even care if leaders were democratically elected. We want them out. Witness Venezuela and Haiti right now, today! The bottom line is Bush would not take "No weapons" for an answer. And you seem to think the only thing wrong here is a lack of an exit strategy.