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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kech who wrote (159482)	2/28/2006 4:57:41 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794015

Why wouldn't Saddam be interested in any weapons he could lay his hands on, including hydrogen bombs and could he make them any time soon? Bear in mind that the "agreement" after the 1990 war wasn't an agreement in the conventional sense of an agreement. It was a surrender document. When something is agreed against somebody's will, it isn't really an agreement. When you hold a gun to their head, they aren't "agreeing" to something. Of course he'll ditch the agreement as soon as he can get away with it. Then, the COW might decide to continue shooting to enforce their ideas. It's all just 12 year old boy's gang stuff among boys who haven't yet grown up properly. Maybe they missed some development years around age 10 - 12 due to overbearing parents. It's important that children develop properly. It was and is pretty clear that WMDs were never a significant issue and certainly not a "40 minutes to launch" issue on any scale. Saddam fired Scuds at Israel which didn't do anything much. They certainly weren't carrying noocular bombs or biological or chemical destruction. I wondered at the time whether Saddam was playing nuclear-bluff, claiming to have nukes which he might or might not have and that he might launch them at Israel if he was attacked. Apparently not. Now, fully invaded and conquered and the doomsday devices were not used, so they didn't exist. Not in any form he could use anyway. Which is as expected. It's amazing that we can still have this discussion years after the obvious. The pathetic, dishonest, "He had intentions of developing programs to some time make hydrogen bombs" which is what the whole WMD clear and present danger was reduced to, is absurd. And a LOT of USA soldiers have paid with their lives and dismemberment and mental problems. Well done chaps!! It would have been more honest and accurate for King George II to say "I can't stand Saddam. I'm a Christian Crusader. He has tried to kill Laura and Poppy and I want revenge. And Omigod, [peace be upon him] look at all that oil which I have just loved all my life. My mates could have a big time party with that lot. And it would be a heck of a lot of fun to take out Saddam, Uday and co and show everyone I'm no Chickenhawk. Then everyone else like China, Iran, North Korea, and Syria will know to mind their p's and q's and who is the top monkey." Mqurice