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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (219423)	2/19/2007 10:14:11 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) of 281500

I don't know why you post that to me. I don't think you need to, or should, believe intelligence 100%. I believe that for wars you need an act of war. For most other matters it really doesn't matter if the intelligence is 100% because the US will bumble its way around the globe whether it has correct or incorrect intelligence. So actually your point about intelligence being inherently unstable supports my position, that you don't go to war preemptively based on intelligence you can never be 100% certain of. If you have an act of war you have a sum certain, and no one is going to argue about it. That's nice when you're going to war- to have a good reason everyone can approve of, and which won't later turn out to not have existed. Right?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next