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


To: MythMan who wrote (140863)12/29/2001 6:19:24 PM
From: Terry Maloney  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 436258
 
If this analysis by stratfor proves out, you may have to lower that target a bit.

The problem is that in Pakistan, there are those who prefer an open breach with the United States to accommodation. Even if we assume that Musharraf is not one of these elements, it is not clear that he can control them. If he can't control them, the United States is faced with an extraordinary dilemma -- to go into Pakistan and get al Qaeda itself. It cannot do this without India, and India will not move unless Pakistan's nuclear weapons are destroyed. It is not clear that U.S. precision-guided munitions are sufficient for a task that will tolerate no failure.

The rest follows logically.


Message 16842404



To: MythMan who wrote (140863)12/29/2001 6:56:05 PM
From: Mike M2  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 436258
 
MM, they are not paid to be accurate they are paid to generate public participation so they can be screwed. ho ho ho BTW nice forecasting but 2002 is the year of TL & EV. mike



To: MythMan who wrote (140863)12/30/2001 11:23:41 AM
From: Lucretius  Respond to of 436258
 
they should have chosen to predict "the range" and they would look a lot better -g-