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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proud Deplorable who wrote (24471)	12/24/2007 1:57:01 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 71588

Saddam could have been taken out by clandestine methods It wouldn't have been easy or certain, and failure would have made it even more difficult. In any case its pretty much irrelevant to the point I raised, or to the point you made that I was responding to. Bush's stated purpose was to remove Saddam so after it was discovered that indeed Saddam was nothing but a loudmouth windbag paper tiger who had zero culpability in 9/11 and had no WMD's , the US should have left Iraq after he was found or even after he was removed. That is a pretty senseless argument. Once your at war you deal with the situation as it is. Even if you think the invasion was a bad idea, it happened. Even if you think the justification was weak that doesn't change the situation on the ground now. You also argue about the situation on the ground now. I don't agree with your points but at least you are making a relevant argument, when you address that issue. The whole justification point is water under the bridge. It's plainly evident from the story below that the Bush admin thinks its above the law and can't be trusted. No it isn't.