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: Steeny who wrote (81427)3/12/2003 2:31:29 AM
From: Dayuhan  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 

This blame the enforcers argument is not credible.

I'm not blaming anybody, just pointing out that nobody was terribly concerned with enforcement, for reasons we all know. We don't know how an extended and aggressive system of enforcement would have worked. It might not have achieved the desired goal. It would, however, have allowed us to approach the next step with the ability to confidently say to our own people and to others that all reasonable alternatives had been exhausted. It would have made it much, much, easier to sell the war to our allies, and develop a broad coalition.

That would have made a difference.

Regarding Bush administration attitudes toward Iraq pre 9-11, Bob Woodward's book makes it pretty clear that regime change was on the agenda.

Might have been on the agenda, but I doubt that it would have ever gotten off the back burner. Political will would not have been there, and there would have been no compelling reason to suffer the political consequences.
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