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 (75286)	2/18/2003 5:53:25 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Of course, the argument is speculative. I find that the M&W position is untenable (and dangerous, ultimately) for lack of a rigorous analysis of what Saddam could do if armed with nukes. Given the fact that he has been quoted as saying that his mistake in '90 was to invade Kuwait before he got nukes, what does that critical bit of evidence say not only about his intentions but about his calculations? I have not seen a proper defense of the M&W line of thinking anywhere. I find it scary not only because it is well-articulated and presented by so-called experts, but because, in my view, its surface appeal will lead otherwise intelligent readers down a primrose path.