SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (77316)6/20/2006 4:04:08 PM
From: sea_biscuitRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
There was no war with them after their invasion was beaten back. You are getting more and more ridiculous. Did Dumbya say that we were at war during the 2000 campaign? If not, why not? What he did say was that he was against nation-building! Which is kind of laughable now that he finds himself trying to build a nation after getting his d*** stuck in a tar pit! :-)



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (77316)6/21/2006 2:09:02 AM
From: American SpiritRespond to of 81568
 
Iraq never attacked the US. Never had anything to do with terrorism. And the only terrorists they harbored had been retired for 30 years.

Saddam was a cruel creep, but no much creepier than Bush's Saudi pals. Saudis stone women to death for cheating on their husbands. Saddam gave women full rights. Saddam's main enemy was not the US but the Shiite Islamic fundamentalists whom he persecuted to stay in power. Some of the same ones we ought to be fearing now.

In the 1980's Reaganites loved Saddam. Rumsfield sold Saddam arms. Maybe even WMD. Gassing the Kurds? No problem, says trhe Reaganites. Didn't complain at all. Oliver North delivered arms to Iran. You have no idea what you're talking about. Wherever you get your info it's a total rightwing disinformation site. And the New York Sun? C'mon Nadine. Get real. Why did Cheney-Bush really want to invade Iraq? for the oil.