SI
SI
discoversearch

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
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (72867)2/10/2003 2:47:52 PM
From: carranza2   of 281500
 
We are at a stage where everyone's opinion's are fixed,..

Not mine.

For example, I've thought all along that the invasion would be a quick event--I no longer think so.

The mass of WMDs Saddam has at his disposal will make progress a lot more slow and perhaps a lot more bloody than I originally thought. He may also strike in the US with WMDs. And AQ may very well do the same. Thus, the possible costs of the invasion are significantly higher than I had originally thought they would be. Nevertheless, I still do not think that the risk/benefit analysis favors restraint.

The case for the proposition that AQ is in some sort of loose alliance with Saddam in my opinion has also been recently strengthened not only by Powell's speech but also by Goldberg's New Yorker article. My opinion that it was unlikely that there was a Saddam/OBL connection is changing.

Please don't presume too much about how people think--I doubt that there are too many people here whose opinions are fixed in concrete.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News