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: LindyBill who wrote (176411)	8/13/2006 12:11:26 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793600

The answer to that is what Cheney calls "The one percent solution." If there was a one percent chance that Saddam could come up with a Nuke, he had to be taken out. The consequences were too dire not to be dealt with. That's not an answer. It's merely a succinct description, a restatement, of what I labeled the elephant people, of which I recall clearly you were a member. We can use the "one-percenter" label rather than "elephant" but that doesn't change my question or provide an answer. Unless you are part of the "Bush lied" tinfoil hat crowd. And your response is the black and white response of one-percenters--if you are not one of them, you must be part of the Bush-lied crowd. Those are treated as the only two possibilities. But they're not. And I don't suppose there are any arguments that Euterpe or I could make to open you up to other possibilities and their implications. Nonetheless, let me state as simply as I can, you don't have to think that WMD was a lie to conclude that getting rid of this potential threat was imperative at any cost. but you can't get around the facts as they were. I can't imagine which facts you have in mind. I don't think any facts are at issue. What is at issue is the validity of the single-minded one-percenter reaction.

To: LindyBill who wrote (176411)	8/13/2006 12:43:14 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793600

For Cheney, the one percent solution was a rather simplistic decision that concluded the consequences were too dire to risk even one chance in 100. The entire framework was far more complex that that for others, who believed that the risks and consequences of making a one percent decision were outweighed by the heavy consequences of being wrong and that the bar needed to be higher to come to Cheney's conclusion. You can agree with Cheney, but to label all others as being part of the tinfoil hat crowd is just more dichotomous thinking.