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: Wharf Rat who wrote (66714)	5/7/2006 7:30:03 PM
From: American Spirit	Respond to of 361311

The war powers vote was not to invade and occupy Iraq, it was to supply the real threat of force in order to make sure Saddam was disarmed, which if Saddam still had WMD and any Al Qaida contacts, was a serious goal, especially after 9-11. Bush promised the senate and congress if they voted for war powers, he would only go to the UN (which he did, and lied) then invade only as a last resort. This LAST RESORT issue is all-important. It's what the whole Iraq War debate is about. Bush broke his promise. And in the process he failed the troops and lost the war. Bush-Cheney also lied in that the intel they gave the senate through crony Pat Roberts was heavily doctored to show only the menace, and not all the discredited claims, including the most recent and most credible intel which stated Saddam had no Al Qaida contacts, no nuclear program, no bio weapons and virtually no poison gas, plus no delivery systems. The UN inspectors were in the process of confirming this when Bush made them leave and started his war. Kerry was the very first major politician to speak out against the war and took major heat from the rightwing for doing so. He also stated when he cast his initial vote that if Bush did not do as he'd promised, Kerry would hold his feet to the fire.