Bill, at the risk of siding with GST or HJ, that's not what GST said (though what his point was is anyone's guess) and this is beyond silly (it's been silly or worse for a while now, of course).
If there are news clips that support or counter a point someone has made or is interesting on its own, by all means post the link and comment on it. The Chirac interview that Glenn posted, for example, was interesting and supported my point that not everyone is either "for us or against us" because some are still hearing and weighing the "case," and considering what the "plan" ought to be.
But too many "no new news" links aren't helpful.
As for disarmament vs. regime change, while I didn't hear exactly what Cheney said, I doubt it was anything that could be reasonably interpreted as "let them keep their weapons programs." More likely, he meant "disarmament is not enough." On which I would note that this ("regime change, regardless") is the "hawkish" camp's view, not necessarily the view that will prevail. IMO, if he can be disarmed, he will be weakened enough that Bush will not risk overt military action to overthrow him (though covert efforts may continue). But he won't be disarmed if there is no threat of military action, so the hawkish talk has a role to play.
JMO,
Bob |
