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: Elroy who wrote (197458)	8/15/2006 4:53:34 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

Every country on the planet thought Saddam had WMDs. So they did - and you know what? we don't know they were wrong, only that the stuff was no longer there by 2003. But Saddam had over a year to hide what he pleased, and there are too many credible reports of Russians taking back illicit stuff they sold, and other stuff being shipped to Syria, for me not to believe it. It would have been just Saddam's style. Here's the analogy. If the local police received a reliable tip that there was a meth lab in a certain apartment, but got delayed a week setting up the raid and found the apartment empty of drugs, and were told that a truck had been seen being loaded two days before, you would be citing this story as evidence that the police had busted a perfectly innocent man? Would that be a reasonable conclusion? No; so why is it held up as the only reasonable conclusion wrt Saddam? As for saying that Nasrallah answers to Tehran before making big moves, that again is obvious. It's like saying that Olmert answers to Bush, except it's even more true, since Nasrallah doesn't have to worry about the demands of democratic politics. Certainly, Lebanon was NOT consulted here. I don't know why you act like this is some farfetched statement that needs to be proved.