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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (215491)	1/20/2005 5:19:32 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573930

To answer your question about how many battles do we need to fight and how many men will we need, I answer that we should fight as many battles and use as many men as we need to destroy terrorism at its source. Iran is a global sponsor of terrorism. So to me, it seems like a logical next step. Right now, Europe is waging the battle diplomatically. Let's hope Europe wins. If they don't, then U.S. military force will be required, whether covert or overt. That is a very long article, so I'm going to have to read it at my leisure later. But I read a little of it. This stands out to me: In a recent essay, Patrick Clawson, an Iran expert who is the deputy director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (and a supporter of the Administration), articulated the view that force, or the threat of it, was a vital bargaining tool with Iran. Clawson wrote that if Europe wanted coöperation with the Bush Administration it “would do well to remind Iran that the military option remains on the table.” He added that the argument that the European negotiations hinged on Washington looked like “a preëmptive excuse for the likely breakdown of the E.U.-Iranian talks.” In a subsequent conversation with me, Clawson suggested that, if some kind of military action was inevitable, “it would be much more in Israel’s interest—and Washington’s—to take covert action. The style of this Administration is to use overwhelming force—‘shock and awe.’ But we get only one bite of the apple.”