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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (182988)	3/6/2006 1:04:08 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

But I think you're missing the point in claiming that Iraq's disclosures were "quite accurate". That's all based upon 20/20 hindsight after years of digging through millions of pages of documents, interviewing detained scientists, and unfettered access to possible sites, none of which we previously had access to. I'm not missing that at all. Saddam claimed in 2003 that he didn't have any, and he was correct. You can spin it any way you like. His INCESSANT DECEIT and unwilingness to just "fess up" everything. He said he didn't have any anymore. He was not lying. Hmm.. doesn't seem to apply to Israel, now does it? I had not noticed anyone in power in the USA asking about them. There are no accusers with any power inquiring, unless you know of some that I don't. There is nothing wrong with inquiring. Its punishing without proof that is a problem. Surely you know this. I note one oddity: Saddam couldn't get rid of all the WMD documents, but somehow he got rid of all the WMD. At any rate, there are 2300 dead american soldiers to account for, all based on an incorrect call IMO.