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: Nikole Wollerstein who wrote (174510)	11/17/2005 12:28:40 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi Nikole Wollerstein; Re: "likely slowly follow the trend of other dictatorships. Likely? Before 9/11 we could rely on this "likely", but after 9/11 with" likely "collusion between Sadam and Al-Queda aggressive approach is better bet." Sometimes "likely" is the best chance you can take. What Bush did was to replace a "likely" with a "lose". The situation before the invasion was that there were essentially no Al Qaeda presence in Iraq. The situation now is that US interests just got bombed in Jordan by Iraqis trained by Al Qaeda. What Bush did was to create his own nightmare. It often happens that a coward, in his attempt to avoid taking a small risk, ends up forcing himself into a much larger one. This is what Bush has done. In this case, the risk of a problem with Saddam has been turned into the certainty of a problem with Iraq. -- Carl