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 (39268)	8/21/2002 3:22:52 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

We don't really know that, yet. No serious discussion. I repeat, if Bush goes with this level of thin support, opposition will go from very little to levels similar to 68-72 opposition to Vietnam in a hearbeat, with bad news. Plenty of discussion, just not in full Congressional swing yet. It's hardly been a non-subject in the news, has it? Opposition to Vietnam grew only after it became a quagmire, with thousands of casualties, and without a clear purpose or an end in sight. So too, opposition will grow if Iraq becomes a quagmire without an end in sight. That would take years, it wouldn't happen "in a heartbeat" at all. But there is no reason to expect it to unless our generals screw up really, really badly. After all, there is no USSR to fund Iraq as it did North Vietnam. As the old saying goes, "Victory has a thousand fathers. Failure is an orphan." We live in a very different communication world now than in the late 60s, early 70s. Yes, the Pentagon exercises more control now. Consider the pictures we did and didn't see in Afghanistan. As for the allies, I gather you intend that as a throwaway line. No, I mean the allies don't vote. Bush is not accountable to them, but to us. A real distinction.