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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (10156)	12/8/2002 1:46:14 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Maureen Dowd is one of my favorites... jw: Maybe she's one of your half-cousins...according to this biography she may be close to your age.. nytimes.com She's a smart Pulitzer Prize winner who has become one of The New York Times leading columnists...Look her up next time you're in New York city...;-) -s2

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (10156)	12/8/2002 1:52:57 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

<<...WE WILL ATTACK IRAQ AFTER FINDING NO EVIDENCE OF WMD OUR REASON: WE FOUND NO EVIDENCE, AND "KNOW" IT IS THERE...>> That arrogance WILL NOT go over well with our allies and it will increase the turbulence over in the Middle East...I fear a U.S. attack against Iraq will only motivate Al Qaeda to increase their resolve to commit more terrorist acts against our 'softer targets' around the world...It doesn't matter how much we spend on defense --> there is NO WAY to totally protect ourselves. Smarter leaders would seriously examine WHY we are being attacked. What are the root causes of all this tension...? -el columbo

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (10156)	12/8/2002 2:03:31 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

WAR WITH IRAQ IS NOT IN AMERICA'S NATIONAL INTEREST bear-left.com Here is an HTML version of an advertisement from the op-ed page of the New York Times of 26 September 2002, signed by 33 scholars of international relations. WAR WITH IRAQ IS NOT IN AMERICA'S NATIONAL INTEREST As scholars of international security affairs, we recognize that war is sometimes necessary to ensure our national security or other vital interests. We also recognize that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and that Iraq has defied a number of U.N. resolutions. But military force should be used only when it advances U.S. national interests. War with Iraq does not meet this standard. -Saddam Hussein is a murderous despot, but no one has provided credible evidence that Iraq is cooperating with al Qaeda. -Even if Saddam Hussein acquired nuclear weapons, he could not use them without suffering massive U.S. or Israeli retaliation. -The first Bush administration did not try to conquer Iraq in 1991 because it understood that doing so could spread instability in the Middle East, threatening U.S. interests. This remains a valid concern today. -The United States would win a war against Iraq, but Iraq has military options—chemical and biological weapons, urban combat—that might impose significant costs on the invading forces and neighboring states. -Even if we win easily, we have no plausible exit strategy. Iraq is a deeply divided society that the United States would have to occupy and police for many years to create a viable state. -Al Qaeda poses a greater threat to the U.S. than does Iraq. War with Iraq will jeopardize the campaign against al Qaeda by diverting resources and attention from that campaign and by increasing anti-Americanism around the globe. -The United States should maintain vigilant containment of Iraq—using its own assets and the resources of the United Nations—and be prepared to invade Iraq if it threatens to attack America or its allies. That is not the case today. We should concentrate instead on defeating al Qaeda. Robert J. Art Brandeis University Richard K. Betts Columbia University Dale C. Copeland University of Virginia Michael C. Desch University of Kentucky Sumit Ganguly University of Texas Charles L. Glaser University of Chicago Alexander L. George Stanford University Richard K. Herrmann Ohio State University George C. Herring University of Kentucky Robert Jervis Columbia University Chaim Kaufmann Lehigh University Carl Kaysen MIT Elizabeth Kier University of Washington Deborah Larson UCLA Jack S. Levy Rutgers University Peter Liberman Queens College John J. Mearsheimer University of Chicago Steven E. Miller Harvard University Charles C. Moskos Northwestern University Robert A. Pape University of Chicago Barry R. Posen MIT Robert Powell UC—Berkeley George H. Quester University of Maryland Richard Rosecrance UCLA Thomas C. Schelling University of Maryland Randall L. Schweller Ohio State University Glenn H. Snyder University of North Carolina Jack L. Snyder Columbia University Shibley Telhami University of Maryland Stephen van Evera MIT Stephen M. Walt Harvard University Kenneth N. Waltz Columbia University Cindy Williams MIT _______________________ Institutions listed for identification purposes only. Paid for by the signatories and individual contributors (773-702-8667; 617-495-5712).

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (10156)	12/8/2002 2:12:05 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Web Posting Vows More Al-Qaida Strikes washingtonpost.com CAIRO, Egypt –– Al-Qaida threatens faster, harder strikes against the United States and Israel "on land, air and sea" in an audio statement attributed to the spokesman for the group blamed for Sept. 11 that was posted on a militant Web site Sunday. "The Jewish Crusader coalition will not be safe anywhere from the fighters' attacks," the audio statement said, using a term common among Islamic militants for what they see as a U.S.-Israeli alliance. "We will hit the most vital centers and we will strike against its strategic operations with all possible means." The statement was attributed to al-Qaida spokesman Sulaiman Abu Ghaith. The Web site also posted a text version of the statement. The pan-Arab satellite station Al-Jazeera broadcast parts of the audio version and the voice sounded similar to that on past al-Qaida videotapes featuring Abu Ghaith. The Web site, which has posted previous statements attributed to the terror network, included what appeared to be a photograph taken from a frame from video of Abu Ghaith with the statement posted Sunday. The whereabouts of Abu Ghaith, along with al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, have been a mystery since the network was chased out of its Afghan haven by U.S. bombing following the Sept. 11 attacks. "We will chase the enemy using the weapon of 'terror' by widening fighting fronts and conducting more concentrated and faster operations ... so (the enemy) feels unsafe and unstable on land, air and sea." The statement attributed to Abu Ghaith also said a purported al-Qaida claim of responsibility for the Nov. 28 attacks on Israelis in Kenya was genuine. That claim was posted on several other Islamic sites last week. Sunday's statement noted that al-Qaida does not usually claim responsibility for attacks, but would do so "according to the relevant circumstances." U.S. officials have said they considered the claim of responsibility for the Kenya attacks to be credible. Terrorism experts believe al-Qaida has made use of the Internet, which enables people to communicate cheaply, widely and anonymously. It has been difficult to trace and confirm postings attributed to al-Qaida that appear periodically on several sites. The sites themselves often disappear and reappear, changing addresses as those who run them try to avoid being identified or after the companies that provide web services shut down sites that have drawn the attention of law enforcement authorities and journalists. © 2002 The Associated Press