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 (56263)	11/8/2002 4:05:08 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 281500

Probably depends if Saddam is in a grandiose mood or a funk. Very astute comment. After the game of hide and seek is over, the blood will flow because Saddam's actions are culturally circumscribed to an extraordinary degree. According to Pollack, giving in to the Americans without first having sustained a serious loss is an anathema to him. I think, therefore, that he'll go to the brink, cross it, then decide what to do in earnest after the bombs start falling. The unfortunate thing is that it is at that point that he will be craziest and least predictable.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (56263)	11/8/2002 4:49:57 PM
From: epsteinbd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

IMO, this time Saddam will cooperate enough to avoid the consequences. His trump card being terror, possibly AQ agents; and the fact that the US hasn't been a direct main target since 9-11 also points toward the validity of my thesis. If the above proves to be correct, Bush only alternative for going in sometimes before the spring will be the AQ issue as a war trigger; the unspecified UN resolution point being: is AQ a weapon of mass destruction or not? And the question of the validity of the war will be fully proven after the final showdown. Now if AQ does attempt some big anti US action soon, it will not invalidate my point.