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 : Support the French! Viva Democracy! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (360)	3/20/2003 9:42:34 AM
From: eims2000	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7833

Would you admit that an invasion counts as "Serious Consequences"?

To: epicure who wrote (360)	3/20/2003 8:14:15 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 7833

It is clear that Powell believed he had an agreement with the UNSC members to authorize regime change if the material breach continued, as it did. I think his knowledge of the meaning given 1441's phrasing is superior to either yours or mines. Second, the "last opportunity" clause is as important as the "serious consequences" clause. Does anyone know of a serious consequence which would have made the "last opportunity" really be the "last opportunity", other than invasion or assassination? I don't think anyone would argue that "last opportunity" means continuing to do the same things that had been done for twelve years without successful resolution of the problem. So what should have been done "serious consequences" wise that would have been different from the policies of the past twelve years?