SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Neocon who wrote (108051)7/25/2003 6:40:13 PM
From: Ish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
<<I would not expect you to notice the difference.......>>

Daniel probably can't notice when dinners on the table.



To: Neocon who wrote (108051)7/26/2003 4:23:29 PM
From: Win Smith  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Nice to see you playing the old tag team game with Ish, Neocon. Peas in a pod again, not to mention "civility" in the neoconese sense of the word. Anyway, some of the stories note the bit of a paper trail Wolfowitz has on grand pronouncements.

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army," Wolfowitz told the House Budget Committee on Feb. 27. "Hard to imagine." washingtonpost.com

Oops. The invasion force hasn't quite provided "stability" yet, but never mind. Wolfowitz had no problem imagining rosy scenarios, though. And anybody who disputed the likelyhood of those rosy scenarios got dumped on, like Shinseki did. Spin it out anyway you like, I don't much care. I will restate my personal rosy scenario, the mess in Iraq is at least going to put the next stage of the PNAC people's grand schemes on hold for the indefinite future. And that's gotta be worth something, in the era of W's $450 billion deficits, we can't afford many more $1 billion / week occupation exercises.