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: carranza2 who wrote (70264)	1/30/2003 12:32:52 PM
From: FaultLine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Such a tactic--if true, a big if--ignores the merits of the campaign, all of which are set forth in Pollack's book. Oh I'm certainly in Pollack's camp. I think we are commenting on our perceptions of how Pearle 'works'. He was pushing for all this looong before The Gathering Storm was published so I don't see what that has to do with my reaction to him. --fl

To: carranza2 who wrote (70264)	1/30/2003 12:39:43 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

A relevant blast from the past: I was saying to Pollack the other day that if the administration had any brains, they'd trumpet his book to the skies, because it provides wonderful support for their basic position, and from an unimpeachable source. He agreed, naturally. Then we both cracked up, because we both assume they'll never do that. Why not? for a few reasons. First, the neocons hate him, because he doesn't favor using the Iraqi opposition and because he ridicules many of their pet strategies and rationales. Second, because these guys are so friggin' arrogant and clueless, they really don't see either the need for, or value of, external validation. And third, because while Pollack favors invasion, he also states very clearly just how he thinks it should be done (overwhelming force) and what has to follow (full-scale occupation and reconstruction)--and neither of those suggestions tallies with what the admin's civilian Iraq hawks want to do... #reply-18046006

To: carranza2 who wrote (70264)	1/30/2003 1:08:58 PM
From: jcky	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Is Pollack a part of the war marketing effort? I don't think so. But his thinking is being ignored by all of those here who oppose the war. Not much discussion of his views, which provide a cogent rationalization for the campaign. I have read Pollack's book and I find his analysis of Iraq reliable, credible, and unbiased. But this does not make his decision-making process infallible or the word of God. It is simply another piece of a complex puzzle. While Pollack makes a very convincing argument that our current containment strategy is faltering and is unlikely to succeed in the long horizon, his presentation of why deterrence may be ineffective against Saddam is more circumstantial than substantive. Pollack provides a cogent rationalization for the invasion of Iraq, but he is also very candid about following through the sequence of war with a Herculean post-conflict reconstruction effort--a task the Bush administration disdains and has little success with.