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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (121849)	6/24/2005 1:24:39 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793817

Ahhhhhhhhhh, kh....I KNEW you could explain the situation, with just the 'little ole' twist' we need to keep things interesting....<ggg> If they were upset, it was only because they were scooped by the dreaded bloggers, not because of their position on Bush or his* war.* BTW....What do the various DoD, Pentagon, CIA, State Department, etc actually contribute to a "war plan"....Surely ALL those various EXPENSIVE Government bureaucrats do something to earn their keep when it comes to "planning a war...."---- Don't they? Surely you don't think one man only plans a war, do you? <-g And surely, you don't think that the only people who planned this war were Republicans, do you???? In fact, I sure wish we could see just what the political "mix" of EACH one of the Government Departments was. THAT would be an interesting piece of knowledge..... his war ?????? LOL!

To: Lane3 who wrote (121849)	6/24/2005 9:30:00 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793817

That he planned, had already decided, to invade Iraq early suggests that the decision process was deceptive, that he was predisposed to go to war so he either intentionally twisted the intelligence to fit his decision and lied to us or mistakenly saw in it what he wanted to see because of his predisposition and rushed to judgment. You could look at it that way, but I don't. I see it as based on an accurate prediction of what Saddam Hussein would do, given many years of past engagement. I also see it as a massive show of force, because Saddam had played rope-a-dope with us and the UN for so long he had to think he could do it forever. Or, as Thomas P.M. Barnett puts it, "we're coming in six months. We're coming in three months. We're coming in one month. We're coming next Tuesday." And we did. What was far less predictable, at least to me, was what the UN would do to pressure Saddam, and how that would play out. As it turned out, Saddam had the UN sussed, and to some extent, paid off. He either didn't believe Bush or didn't care. Either way, Bush was right to prepare for any eventuality, including what happened. The only people I know who feel otherwise are ones who felt it was wrong to invade, period. Wrong to invade, therefore wrong to prepare to invade.