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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (47548)	11/13/2005 6:57:03 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

The 1998 regime change resolution was nothing more than a means to keep pressure on Saddam. But Dumbya's argument in 2002/03 was that we were in grave danger and had to do something militarily, right away. Big difference between the two. The Dems message must be simple -- Dumbya told us lies, and we blundered into believing them (though about half of us did not). As for Hillary, I think any Democrat who voted for the invasion (whether they were for it, or got bullied/suckered by Dumbya) has no Presidential future, considering how incredibly messy Iraq will be, 3 FULL YEARS from now. If she is repentant enough, she might be able to hold on to her Senate seat.

To: steve harris who wrote (47548)	11/13/2005 7:49:37 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

Baloney. The Executive Branch PROVIDES intelligence. The Congress CONSUMES it. The provider, not the consumer is at fault when it lied so absurdly and transparently. It is, take your pick, 1. Utter incompetence punishable by impeachment and removal to categorically say that the aluminum tubes were good only for centrifuges. 2. Lying, punishable by impeachment and removal to categorically say that the aluminum tubes were good only for centrifuges. I'll ask again. If there was so much good intelligence, well vetted and investigated by our $44 BILLION intelligence apparatus, why did the WH resort to that kind of crappola? If there was so much good intelligence that Rumsfeld said WE KNEW where there were megatons of WMDs were between Baghdad and Tikrit, why didn't we go to that location and find them immediately after entering the area? Why? You guys can never answer these questions because it would require actually doing some research instead of getting marching orders from your rightwing talkinghead masters.