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: Dayuhan who wrote (77593)	2/26/2003 11:58:04 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

2. Why are spokespeople in DC making comments that are raising havoc in Manila and threatening Philippine support for the operation? Is this just stupidity on an epic scale, or is there some bizarre logic to it? Steven, I really have no serious information or observations to offer on why the US is involved in the Phillipines beyond the rather obvious conclusion we can all reach, that they are looking for easy victories right now. And with their near ability to convince the American public that attacking Iraq and Al Q are almost equivalent ventures, and thus that a success in the first should be counted toward a success in the second, they may also think that a Philipines success keeps serious questions from being raised about Indonesia. Which is a much, much harder nut to crack. I gather. On the business, however, of folk in this administration popping off, it does seem to be a serious problem for them. I noticed in today's NYTimes that they've dropped a big plan to restructure IRA contributions and thus pension plans because they had not properly vetted it with the congressional republicans in advance. We've seen Douglas Feith testify before congress about money and planning for post Iraq in which he had to admit they hadn't really planned seriously. And we've seen them forget to put money for Afghanistan in the budget. I consider these indications of priorities not indications of a messy administration. But folk they use to put the policy before the public tend to be some of the more ideological kinds, you get these genuinely odd and chauvinistic and objectionable comments. That would likely not have come from the more seasoned veterans. However, it's the comments of the ideologues that, in contrast with the Clinton administration's problems with public presentations, are windows into the soul of the Bush folk. Thus, I think that whacky comment tells us much more than itself.