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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (22841)	3/18/2003 7:05:56 PM
From: Steeny	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

Hawkmoon, you are kidding yourself if you don't think another President could have sold this war. Bush1 would have done 10X better under the same circumstances. It's not the war or our allies that has changed very much, but the quality of the salesmen. Bush1 team were pros & these guys are well... Gen Brent Scowcroft has called it "amateur hour" in the current Whitehouse. James Baker, who really masterminded the Gulf War, has been very quiet. Bush2 has pissed on our allies. It's not a question of cajones, it's a question what is in the best longterm interests of the US. We are going to need our allies in other battles ahead(Korea, Iran, Palestine, terror war) all spring to mind. France would have been isolated by the world if the Bush1 team had been in command. They would be kicking and screaming on the sidelines, but they'd be alone. I'm in favor of this war, but our tactics are wrong. Giving Powell a free hand(without being chopblocked by Rumsfeld & the uberhawks) could have kept all our Allies in formation. Iraq would still be looking down the barrel of a daisycuter, but we'd be far better off.