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: tekboy who wrote (19582)	2/22/2002 2:31:30 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

OT: Speaking of "time will tell"...look at the time of your post....

To: tekboy who wrote (19582)	2/22/2002 3:49:46 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

One reason for the difference in their views might be that the second guy is more junior than the first, so his view is more that of a lower-echelon-crowd. From that vantage point things always look screwed up (after all, if staffers felt their bosses were doing a good job, what would they bitch about?), and it's possible that's clouding his judgment. Especially interesting in light of the higher-ranking guy's belief that decisions in this administration are made by principals, who play their cards close to the chest.

To: tekboy who wrote (19582)	2/22/2002 9:53:14 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

I believe the "axis of evil" comments were deliberate, and represent how Bush actually feels. However, I do believe that staff responsible for "game-playing" the potential political repercussions from what is contained in such speeches dropped the ball and didn't think it through. I'm not a neo-con, or even a retro-con.. I'm a moderate, and I like to believe, a pragmatist. But I also believe that the primary nations responsible for creating regional (and global) political tension are those nations, as well as a few others that should have been named to the axis. And I could see myself making such a speech as well, because it represents a sound logic. These are governments where oppression is systemic... One oppressive government replacing another, with the people stuck in the middle, never truly being empowered to make government accountable to them except through revolution and upheaval. So I can see how that line got into, and remained in, the speech, since Bush would have had to approve the content. He feels it, and probably a bit more. But politically speaking, he probably could have picked a more PC manner in which to say it without churning up WWII flashbacks of the Axis and Allies. Hawk