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: RetiredNow who wrote (324192)	2/1/2007 7:16:59 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1575426

"Iran with nukes is a very bad thing for everyone." That seems to be common knowledge, but I don't agree. I don't think Iran is as crazy as their President, just as we aren't as crazy as ours. I still think an Iran with nukes would put a brake on out-of-control Israeli behavior. Far better than WE ever have. I don't think Israel would have done Lebanon if Iran had had nukes. Nukes seem to constrain in balance of power situations.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (324192)	2/1/2007 7:52:43 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575426

The Bush administration has postponed plans to offer public details of its charges of Iranian meddling inside Iraq amid internal divisions over the strength of the evidence, U.S. officials said. U.S. officials promised last week to provide evidence of Iranian activities that led President Bush to announce Jan. 10 that U.S. forces would begin taking the offensive against Iranian agents who threatened Americans. But some officials in Washington are concerned that some of the material may be inconclusive and that other data cannot be released without jeopardizing intelligence sources and methods. They want to avoid repeating the embarrassment that followed the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, when it became clear that information the administration cited to justify the war was incorrect, said the officials, who described the internal discussions on condition of anonymity. "We don't want a repeat of the situation we had when [then-Secretary of State] Colin L. Powell went before the United Nations," said one U.S. official, referring to Powell's 2003 presentation on then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's unconventional weapons program that relied on evidence later found to be false. "People are going to be skeptical." Concern that the evidence may be bogus would seem like a decent reason not to release it. -- Josh Marshall talkingpointsmemo.com