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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fred Levine who wrote (65796)	9/12/2002 3:11:20 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

CCNY 1966 same lessons learned. My con law prof Hillman Bishops favorite quote about positions folks take politically or legally was "it all depends on whose ox is being gored." At U of Chicago, where i majored in international politics 100 years ago, i was taught by all the greats. Always taught to look at unintended consequences of action or inaction. I wrote this to my son today regarding Iraq. "My view of bush is as follows: 1. 9/11 has made bush realize that 4 presidents including himself either failed to recognize the threat and/or ignored it. Guilty as charged for all of them. 2. Thus the War on Terror 3. Re: Iraq, he feels that the last three presidents have blown it here too and he will not let himself make that error again as in waiting for a bio-chem or nuke attack from sadam. Is he right to draw this conclusion from the failure with bin laden or can saddam be contained. My feeling is that containment is a bad word. We contained the soviets in europe and the chinese in korea and so on. But after the korean war what we had was a balance of terror between two superpowers. In retrospect most think it worked well but TRUST ME it didnt. We were an inch away from world destruction in october of 1962. Only after that did we agree to limit the extent of the cold war with the soviets. So of course that led to vietnam limited war bullshit and 50k american deaths. And that doesn’t take into account the enslavement of eastern Europe and other parts of the world. So no it didnt really work. And with saddam, an unstable, evil perhaps maniacal leader--probably has syphilis like al capone, how can we say deterrence or balance of terror will work. I cant see it. He will not believe we will act if he invades kuwait again and has agents in the US to release poison or suitcase nukes.. And you know he might just be right. Save Kuwait at the expense of a million American dead would not fly politically. We might as well cut that deal now with Saddam and split up the oil. I think bush is right. What is your take?"