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 : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (20857)	7/4/2006 2:14:19 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35834

Had you bothered to follow this story objectively you wouldn't have drawn the faulty conclusions you now hold. Let's review my conclusions: 1. This is not WMD (you did not address this) 2. This is not news (you did not address this) 3. Every American household has chemicals that degrade over time and remain hazardous and potentially lethal. Conceding my point #3, you change the subject to legal issues: Even if every single chemical munition was dated prior to the first Gulf War, they still were still 100% illegal. Perhaps they were technically illegal. Certainly, the UN had an opportunity to rule them illegal and sanction an enforcement mechanism, but the UN pointedly did not. Thus, Bush's invasion of Iraq was 100% illegal. Perhaps the UN realized that a few decaying scraps from a long-defunct WMD program (which was enthusiastically supported by Reagan) were no threat to the world. Perhaps the UN realized that the Neocons wanted to destroy Iraq as a country, a goal that has been achieved. Tom