Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

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

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: tekboy who wrote (35307)	7/30/2002 11:08:53 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) of 281500

lol...looks like somebody else has been reading the Pollack galleys (after I told him to!<g>)... tb@youheardmesayitfirst.com Thanks for posting the Zakaria piece, tek. As I read it, there are three points which interest me. 1. That the sanctions regime has deteriorated to the point of ineffectiveness and Saddam is using that to increase his wmd stockpile. I guess I'll have to read Pollack's book to see a credible version of this argument. 2. That it's necessary to have an alliance built out of UN support before attacking. Since I think that makes my point that the Bush folk have to offer strong justifications for any serious action beyond containment, that seems right to me. 3. That Iraq can be a symbol of modernity in the region. Now that one strikes me as almost the key and not likely to be a goal of this administration. Zakaria seems to me to be arguing against the Bush folk doing anything because of the extreme likelihood of a negative on this point. Or sees it as necessary to position himself when they do attack.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next