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 (127426)3/26/2004 12:55:20 PM
From: boris_a  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Anti- terrorist plan adopted by the EU
They are going to invade Uruguay?

Strategy:
"Beyond that, we can draw many operatives into Uruguay to attack our troops, in a situation where we have a much freer hand to search and destroy. In other words, Uruguay becomes an important battleground for fighting terrorists, and is thus simplifying matters."



To: Neocon who wrote (127426)3/26/2004 3:37:24 PM
From: Sig  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
On the terrorist front, the EU seems to be going it alone(without the US). Which is OK, to be expected, and is another powerful force arrayed against terrorists.

Still they lack one thing of supreme importance which is the ability to reach a major decision swiftly.

If an Al Queda cell is found (in Equador for example) that needs immediate elimination, then one country acting alone can negotiate faster, act faster, than a alliance.

They dont trust us, we dont completely trust them. But to do the job properly somebody will have to trust someone.

And that man will apparently be the following:

<<<The plan foresees the nomination of a "terrorism Czar", Gijs DeVries, former secretary of State for the interior in the Netherlands.>>>

Has Spain decided on any major course of action yet, like bomb some place in Morroco ? Or are they just going to arrest those who enter the country.?


Sig.

<<<Kerry promises to create 10 million jobs>>>

All in government, perhaps?(g)