Politics for Pros- moderated 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 : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: gamesmistress who wrote (24974)	1/18/2004 11:27:26 AM
From: gamesmistress	Read Replies (1) of 793782

Speaking of the nature and level of the threat from Saddam, here's a good post from the FA thread summarizing a Ken Pollack interview on NPR this morning. There's also a link to the interview in the original post. Despite the problems, Pollack sticks by his previous points, i.e., Saddam was a tremendous destabilizing force in the ME, threatening our economy, and a human rights disaster, though he waffles a bit on whether he would have gone to war on Bush's timing, a point in my opinion that doesn't take into account the possibility that Saddam could have obtained fissile material on the black market as well as the overriding political consideration I believe drove the timing, namely, that Bush recognized himself as a potential one term President who fears that the Dems for diplomatic or domestic political reasons would be unable to take the necessary risks when the timing for an operation became obvious. No one has adequately explained to me why it wasn't a good idea to take out Saddam because of the possibility that he could have obtained fissile material on the black market, something he clearly would have done given the opportunity. Message 19705236

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next