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: Murrey Walker who wrote (171434)	6/27/2006 5:51:54 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793917

What's your opinion of that herring? I've posted about this before. While multiple reasons were mentioned, the emphasis was on WMD. That may have been because the WH considered that the key reason. Or it may have been because it caused such a flurry that it sucked air out of the room disproportionate to it's importance. Of it may be that they thought it would be the most persuasive. But it was pretty clear to me that WMD was the poster child, especially when Powell took it to the UN in that last ditch effort to get support. I didn't think that was a good reason then. I didn't think any of the reasons, or all of them together, were good enough to justify the risk. I said at the time that I thought invading Iraq was precipitous and I think that's been pretty much proven to be the case. Surely you understand that. I do recognize that pols are pols, regardless of stripe. Sad to say.