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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (108547)	7/28/2003 5:00:58 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 281500

And if they manage to discredit that load of dung, you will make up even more stuff that has no basis in fact or reality.

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (108547)	7/28/2003 5:06:03 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If I did not have an impending errand, I would address this in detail. Suffice it to say that even Kuwait liberalized somewhat under US pressure, and, in any event, was not properly a Neocon operation. We are moving quickly to give Iraqi civilians real authority in Iraq, so it is hardly a military government, even if the occupation authorities reserve rights to veto to preserve order. Afghanistan is too soon to call. It is difficult to avoid factionalization and tribal war there. At least it has a chance of a better result than the Taliban. You do not sign treaties that you think are against your national interests too much. You use the mechanisms available to get out of treaties that are anachronistic, as with the ABM treaty. And you fudge here and there if you think there is an overriding reason to. Clinton did in the Kosovo matter, Bush did here. That is not a Neocon thing, that is how all states operate, including France, when it serves their interests........