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: michael97123 who wrote (64251)	1/3/2003 2:46:49 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Good points, Michael. I was aware of that and tried to put some mild calendar and significance disclaimers in (I had in mind from Reagan forward and should have said so), but I'll take them down. You're right. I certainly would include the Bay of Pigs, would not include the Cuban Missile Crisis (that was clearly foisted upon us), would include Vietnam all the way thru Nixon. Good list. Now to your question. I gather you are asking what could be done if Iraq had nuclear weapons, did some dastardly deed, and threatened to use them if the US tried to stop them. Is that it? I genuinely don't know. If learning foreign policy nuances is a ten level project, with ten the tops, I think I'm about at the second, perhaps third level. Best ask tek who is at level eleven. But ignorance has yet to stop any of us on this board from typing yet another post. So, I'll go. Short though. Right now Mearshimer (most likely mispelled) makes the most sense to me simply because he's the one proposing deterrence most recently. Everyone's view of what to do relies on some view of Saddam's personality. M's makes the most sense to me right now. Ruthless, cruel, vicious, you name it, but containable. Now, the opposite question arises. Assume the Bushies take the US into Iraq, populations in the Arab states explode in anger, some states go down (perhaps Jordan, perhaps others), US troops occupying Iraq are sitting ducks for attacks of all sorts, and the recruitment base of Al Qaeda multiples exponentially. There are risks both ways. That's why foreign policy strikes me as four dimensional chess.