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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (376414)	3/22/2003 4:52:30 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769669

I agree with many of your points. However, I think that Bush (and the conservatives in general) tend to think of the situation in simpler terms. You could say too simple, or you could say that liberals tend to overthink things (boy, does that put a big target on my butt, or what?) Here is a sort of flow chart of the argument (the engineers amongst us will like this). 1) Do you believe that Saddam either has WMD or wants them? If not, go to 5. 2) Do you believe that Saddam will use these WMD? If not, go to 6. 3) Do you believe that we should wait for Saddam to use these WMD? If so, go to 7. 4) Preemptive attack is the only solution. End. 5) IMHO, a naive position, given Saddams history of use of chemical weapons and past actions to obtain WMDs. End. 6) IMHO, a credible but dangerous opinion. He is clearly wacko, and we don't know what will set him off. End. 7) IMHO, indefensible. If you think he has WMD, or desires to, and would use them, then we HAVE to take him out. End. I personally arrived at 4. However, as I've stated, I think Bush did a lousy job on the diplomacy side, and that will not only potentially endanger our troops and/or the objective, but have potentially large negative long term ramifications.