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: greenspirit who wrote (68951)	1/26/2003 3:39:57 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

Can't say I'm familiar enough with their editorial board to venture a guess who wrote it. But, aren't these kind of positions normally done under some sort of consensus framework? I have the same impression so I don't doubt that the overall position reflects the board. I have no idea how they decide; some sort of vote, consensus necessary, what. However, I was commenting about the tone. Reads like Hoagland's tone.

To: greenspirit who wrote (68951)	1/26/2003 4:54:01 PM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Can't say I'm familiar enough with their editorial board to venture a guess who wrote it. Probably Fred Hiatt, the editor. Hiatt's been quite a hawk recently, and has run a noticeably hawkish page (Kelly, Krauthammer, Kagan, Kristol, Will, etc. etc.). I know some folks who have columns published there on occasion, and they feel that Hiatt is loath to pick up ones that criticize the administration's foreign policy too much... 'Course, it could be Anne Applebaum too, who's quite conservative and writes a lot about foreign policy as well.... washpost.com washingtonpost.com discuss.washingtonpost.com