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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (8756)	11/3/2001 1:23:19 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

1. Actually, Chomsky's numbers seem about right, and I don't think Hitchens disagrees with them. He just disagrees with Chomsky's tone. I do agree that Chomsky might be exaggerating when he talks about the political and social consequences of the bombing, comparing this to Guatemala or the Congo. 2. The evil part of the U.S. bombing in Sudan is not the actual bombing. That caused minimal casualties, and it might have been an honest effort to halt chemical weapons production. The real crime is the ensuing action, blocking UN inquiry into the matter and blocking any efforts by the Sudan to rebuild. One unfortunate consequence of our actions in Sudan: <<< Just before the missile strike, Sudan detained two men suspected of bombing the American embassies, notifying Washington, US officials confirmed. But the US rejected Sudan's offer of cooperation, and after the bombing Sudan "angrily released" the suspects (James Risen, NYT, July 30, 1999), since named as bin Laden operatives. Recently leaked FBI memos add another reason why Sudan "angrily released" the bin Laden associates. The memos confirm that the FBI wanted the suspects extradited, but the State Department refused. One "senior CIA source" now describes this and other rejections of Sudanese offers of cooperation as "the worst single intelligence failure in this whole terrible business [of Sept. 11]. It is the key to the whole thing right now," because of the voluminous evidence on bin Laden that Sudan offered to produce, offers that were repeatedly rebuffed because of the administration's "irrational hatred" of the Sudan, the senior CIA source reports. Included in Sudan's rejected offers was "a vast intelligence database on Osama bin Laden and more than 200 leading members of his al-Qaeda terrorist network in the years leading up to the 11 September attacks." Washington was "offered thick files, with photographs and detailed biographies of many of his principal cadres, and vital information about al-Qaeda's financial interests in many parts of the globe," but refused to accept the information, out of "irrational hatred" of the target of its missile attack. "It is reasonable to say that had we had this data we may have had a better chance of preventing the attacks" of Sept. 11, the same senior CIA source concludes (David Rose, Observer, Sept. 30, reporting an Observer investigation). >>> Tom

To: JohnM who wrote (8756)	11/3/2001 8:07:36 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi JohnM; Re Chomsky's argument about the drugs produced &c. Actually, humans are sort of famous for their ability switch between sources of stuff, and I believe he ignored that. You might as well argue that when the local Safeway is damaged by excessive snowfall and closes for 3 months worth of repairs it means that the people who used to shop there are going to go hungry. In addition, humans are famous for their ability to rebuild things, he probably didn't take that into account either. The left wing never did give much credence to the universality of human abilities. That's why they believe that people need their "help". They feel the same way about human nature, hence the (frequent!) argument that even though they themselves are evidently moved by force, the enemy is immune. -- Carl