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: Sun Tzu who wrote (153358)	12/5/2004 1:08:16 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

It seems unlikely that an agreement could have been made without long negotiations, and even more unlikely to make such a false claim and get away with it. I didn't mean to say that the claim was false. "Self-interested" is not the same as "false". I'm sure the diplomacy happened, and I'm sure it had some part to play in the result, and I'm equally sure that the diplomats thought it had a major and probably definitive part to play. Diplomats tend to think like that about diplomacy. I was just suggesting that people without a personal stake in the analysis of the situation might very well add 2 + 2 together in a rather different fashion, and notice the effect of Saddam's capture as a "closer" for the deal.