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 (47475)	9/27/2002 12:52:04 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

so that one can think carefully about it. As opposed to the present level of conversation the Bush folk foster. Ya gatta realize that the level of argument in the book may appeal to those here, but "Sound Bite" is all the Media has time for. From what I have read, I think the book may change your mind on our Iraqi actions.

To: JohnM who wrote (47475)	9/27/2002 12:58:22 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Looks exactly like the kind of argument the Bush folk should have been making all along. And an argument that is specifically grounded, so that one can think carefully about it. As opposed to the present level of conversation the Bush folk foster. If the NYT piece is a synopsis of the book, then the arguments in favor of invasion are that much stronger. I really do disagree with your point about the Bush arguments. The administration's main thesis as I have understood it all along is that it is unacceptable to have a madman in control of WMDs. Isn't that what Pollack essentially implied in the NYT piece? I presume it is the bottom line in his book, as well.