Foreign Affairs Discussion Group 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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Neocon who wrote (131392)	5/4/2004 4:45:59 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (3) of 281500

Please note that I didn't use your name, I said "[fill in the blank....]". The reason I did that was that I really didn't know if you had posted all of those things or not, but surely you must agree that all of those things were posted by numerous people either here on this thread on articles, op ed pieces, speeches, interviews, etc. People have been claiming that Carl's predictions are not to be trusted because he didn't think Bush would be stupid enough to invade Iraq. But he has been proven right about many more things than that, and many of the same people who complain about him being "wrong" that once made at least some of (and at times, many of) the predictions he listed. Personally I think Carl is still indulging in wishful thinking if he thinks Bush is leaving Iraq if he wins this election. But that just means that he doesn't read Bush very well; he understands guerilla warfare and occupations better than anyone else on this thread, IMO. Including me.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next