Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (130828)	10/24/2001 2:45:35 PM
From: RocketMan	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 436258

I know you're no fan of Powell, but I'm not sure that in the first Bush administration he had the level of influence on foreign policy that you suggest. Remember, his background is one of a military thinker, not a global diplomat (I questioned his current appt as Secretary of Sate). His doctrine of decisive power directed only at those battles/wars where we have the ability and desire to win comes from his Vietnam days when our power was misused. Our failure to finish the job in Iraq I'm not sure can be layed on Powell's shoulders as much as on James Baker and Brent Scowcroft. Powell was only Chief of Staff back then, dealing strictly with military matters, as he was reminded on occasion at NSC meetings. On the Wahabbis, there is some British blowback there, since Abd al-Wahhab was used by the Brits to unify the Arabian peninsula and weaken Ottoman influence. Probably did not matter much in the 19th century, but it turned out that the Wahabbis control territory that turned out to contain much of the world's energy reserves.