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: E who wrote (50250)10/8/2002 4:15:32 PM
From: jcky  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Thanks for the article, E.

What I find most troubling about the current administration's foreign policy wonks is their lack of candor in evaluating imminent threat. I can say the pre-emption war hawks are correct is stating the nature of our enemies have changed: they are a loosely coordinated, faceless, nationless threat with no easily identifiable targets for retaliation. And unfortunately, we cannot attack with our high tech military weapons the threat we cannot identify or locate. So it is much easier to place the blame on a regime or government with landmarks which can be targeted with our high tech military weaponry.

The threat from al-Qaida was always known but ignored by our intelligence community. What this country need is not a new policy of pre-emption but a new process to assess credible threat and a coherent multilateral approach to attack the underlying infrastructure which support these threats. And if it is uncovered that a state is sponsoring these threat against Americans then I am for openly declaring war against these countries.

Unfortunately, the president is lacking in the evidence department a credible link tying Saddam to either 9/11 or al-Qaida. His administration's strategy of throwing as much information against Saddam upon a wall and seeing what sticks for the American public is really quite childish. We will get our war with Iraq that the hawks desperately want from the support of Congress, but it is not because Iraq is an immediate threat. It is now politically expedient to support the president on the war against terror.
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