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: Ilaine who wrote (40078)	8/26/2002 5:45:43 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi CobaltBlue; Re: "Nope, nothing to see here. Move along, move along." The thing I think is hilarious about all this is that now the theory is that the Bush administration is keeping its justification for the war against Iraq secret (i.e. "I've also posted that immediately prior to, or simultaneously with, attacking, we'd reveal our justification, but not sooner. No point tipping our hand." #reply-17920558 ), but on the other hand is very publicly leaking its plans on the war. If a war were in the offing, the justification would be made public, (so that our allies would come on board), but the military plans would remain secret. It's not like the world hasn't been presented with this sort of thing before. *It's a universal fact of history that nations trumpet their justifications [righteous or otherwise] and keep their military plans secret.* Operating in the reverse would give Saddam warning as to the attack, but minimize our ability to generate it. It's outside the realm of the believable that the Bush administration would have missed this essential fact of human behavior. And in fact, the Bush administration has been trying to justify a war with Iraq. They just haven't been convincing at it. -- Carl