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: LindyBill who wrote (399722)	4/27/2003 3:50:26 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 769670

I believe the 4th ID could have had us inside Bagdad up to a week sooner or more. On the other-hand not having a 50 year sand storm also cost a lot of time. My opinion is based upon the fog caused by even more vectors of threat. Consider the extra fear and confusion if one does not know if the bullet coming to strike one between the eyes is coming from the front or the back. That's the effect of the Northern Front. Also there were no storms up North. But based upon the tech of the 4th, they would not have mattered much anyway. And when I see so many speak in judgement with so much obvious ignorance of the process, say... "Frank's robotics around Rummy is well known" This is another silly urban myth that ID's weak or ignorant minds. idiot.mine.nu is about having a reference of obvious examples of fools who actually say publicly what is found there. The are obvious instant idiot or sick mind identification posts. It's a way to quickly inform anyone about who is really posting and why several may call that individual the samo samo idiot or slug. I have read many of your posts and your are not an idiot or a slug in any way shape or form. Just a tad mis-guided or mis-informed maybe. And often I agree with what you post. You say the plan started with and then ended width. Having been involved with planning major projects, Planing is about asking what is the least and what is the most and then attacking both proposals to find what is the optimum and safety is a paramount consideration. Having supervised others, I will devils advocate a position opposite of what is proposed and argue. On several occasions I have convinced subordinates the my way was better and at the end of the discussion I then directed them to do it their way much to their surprise. They just did not see the holes they had exposed in my original opinions. I saw the holes in their ideas and went with the smallest holes. But my public position would give rise to the ignorant telling how I was so dumb....