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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (480596)	5/14/2009 10:39:59 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1574854

Here is one of my posts from the period... "We maintained sanctions against Iraq for nearly a decade after the first Gulf War. We did that because the regime of Saddam Hussein was considered to be a threat to the peace and freedom of others. During this time hundreds of thousands of people died as a direct result of the sanctions. Even though the policy was not to target those people, statement from persons like Albright demonstratively made it clear that they were the targets. So, I protested the sanctions as a bad strategy. When we came to a decision point on whether to invade Iraq we had to weigh many issues including the deteriorating support for sanctions, the maneuvering of Saddam to get around them, and the statements from him that indicated he was biding his time until he could garner his resources to take us out. Even though he was not an immediate threat, his cat and mouse gaming made it clear that it was a matter of time until we would have to contend with him militarily. Sooner was clearly better than later. In addition to that his regime was brutal and tyrannical to the extent that any person of conscience has to support his disposition from power." I trust you to continually lie and spin about it as it serves your purposes. Its what ya do ...