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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (53310)	10/20/2002 9:40:51 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'd be curious to know what their stripes were. It's kind of horrific when you think about it, to have it easily assumed that Bush & co would just gin up an unnecessary war for no reason save short-term political gain, without at the least giving some credit for their belief in the threat, even if you do not agree. Good question but I'm not precisely certain. Whereas I could tell you within a fair degree of certainty where my close friends among my academic colleagues would come down on just about any political issue, I cannot with these. These are fairly new friends of my retirement, among a larger set I've made since I now spend my time here rather than two thirds of the week almost 200 miles away at work. They are definitely not long time democrats, nor are they rabid right republicans. Perhaps the best way to characterize them, until I get to know them better, is that sort of large box labeled independent. Jersey has quite a few. They increasingly see Bush as governing from the farther right which they don't like. Oh, as I type, I think I can come up with their general allegiance. We are close to Marge Roukema's district. They admire her politics. At least I gather so from some asides. And that's lumping the three together when they are no doubt not so. These are, of course, only anecdotes. But not surprising in Jersey. Particularly northeastern Jersey. What "facts" have not turned out to be true? I agree the reasons given have shifted, but to me that is explained by political pressure and the fact that the true reason is a poltical 'own goal' if you speak it out loud -- we are trying to avoid Saddam's being able to deter us. I have no idea what's in their minds. That comes from a comment I made in the conversation to which they nodded their heads. On the goal above, I think that's only one of several and continue to believe that the larger goal within which Iraq is contained is as a demonstration of US military power. I take very seriously the oft stated aim in the various papers coming from this administration that intends to make the world safe for US interests (in the narrowest sense of that word). And thus the starting point is Iraq and access to oil. Tony Judt's piece in the NYTimes this morning notes, once again, how much that undermines a serious war on the kind of terrorism Al Qaeda illustrates. Polls do not reflect what your friends tell you in Bergen county. One can hardly argue with that if the point is that Bush himself remains popular in national polls. But I think a lot of disquiet floats beneath the surface. It may or may not surface in the November elections. Right now it looks as if Rove has done a good job of keeping it underwater. But events can crystallize such that a personality that charms gets connected to policies that harm and the personality looks less attractive.