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: Elsewhere who wrote (130199)4/27/2004 7:12:52 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
A good analyst with "out-of-the-box" thinking could have imagined that Saddam is just playing poker with the world - especially since the UN inspectors didn't find any WMD anymore; their remaining questions mainly concerned the accounting of the destruction.

He would have had to be a genius of an analyst, an Einstein of deduction. Everything known about Saddam pointed to the exact opposite of what has been determined to be the facts.

In order to be credible, this super-analyst would have had to prove a negative circumstantially, as all negatives are proven. The circumstances [previous use of WMD, attempts to obtain them, continous and repeated inspection evasion, megalomania, etc.], unfortunately, did not at the time suggest that Saddam was bluffing.

And he may not have been bluffing. The full story may not have yet played out.

C2@notinthebox.com
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