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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (100033)	6/3/2003 3:52:31 PM
From: NickSE	Respond to of 281500

That's the opposite of how he felt during his last appearance on Charlie Rose. He thinks it was a huge mistake on the US part to let Tommy disappear after the war. Franks just decimated the Iraqi army and would have been feared by enemies within and around Iraq. Instead the US squandered that power and let him slip quietly into the night giving these 'crazy mullahs' an opportunity to seize control. Imho, he gets right to the problem like the UPI article does. We've been too damn soft over there. We're too afraid to offend anyone with this idea of US occupation. If we don't stop worrying about this, and wield enough authority to get Iraq on the road to recovery, our whole idea of reforming the M.E. just went out the window. I can just imagine what he would have said if Tommy Franks had come into Iraq like Douglas McArthur redux.