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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (30633)5/24/2002 7:58:57 PM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Military Bids to Postpone Iraq Invasion
Joint Chiefs See Progress In Swaying Bush, Pentagon 's c

After thinking about the Post article for a while, it seems a bit more complicated.

Its source is clearly in or close to the Joint Chiefs. Why would they do so? Usually the purpose of these leaks is to influence a policy debate one way or the other. How could this leak fit into that. The story is written as if the Joint Chiefs have made their point and that's that. But that would not explain the leak. Unless, to take it one step deeper into the leaker layers, it's leaked by some place in the bureaucracy that lost the argument to the Chiefs and, by leaking it, wishes to force the Bush administration to publicly disown the leak and thus push them back a bit closer to the invasion argument.

Interesting event.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News