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 (224533)	10/17/2007 9:04:13 AM
From: JDN	Respond to of 793964

I'm not for war with Iran UNLESS at a minimum the entire European Union joins us and better yet the Arab republics likely to become vassals of a Nuclear Iran. However, IMHO we have PLENTY of reason to do so. If Teddy Roosevelt were still president we probably would have some time ago. If the world sits on its hands and allows Iran to go Nuclear its gonna be a tough road ahead for EVERYONE. jdn

To: LindyBill who wrote (224533)	10/17/2007 3:08:53 PM
From: the_wheel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793964

This article is damning for the current administration. It is very well written and makes a case for missed opportunities for diplomacy after the attack. This article's tone and content is a huge contrast with the BS I hear at the Dems debate, when they step on each other's toes to see who can tippy toe out of Iran, I mean Iraq, the fastest. Why did the geographers have to stick Iraq and Iran next to each other? "before the Democrats take over ... in the first half of '08" Assumption is Hillary is a foregone conclusion, not to wonder with all the arguments that the social conservatives put forth against Rudy. Unless Obama can show he would make a better diplomat. Still, remember Hillary has her roving ambassador husband, that's a BIG plus. <Abdullah stood up. "That's it. This meeting is over."> Showdown in Texas. Guess who backed down. There was a lot of hand holding I remember. Guess Abdullah showed him who's the boss, oil is at $87 today. Might want to check the Dow also, the Dems diplomacy WRT Turkey seems to be having an effect on that. <There's a heavy haze and floating bugs and for a moment it feels a bit ominous, a gathering silence, one of those moments when giant pods start to sprout in local basements.> Yep, it's ominous all right, wonder how Hillary will deal diplomatically with what comes out of those pods. LOL

To: LindyBill who wrote (224533)	10/17/2007 10:14:12 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793964

As a CIA analyst, Leverett had come to the view that Middle Eastern terrorism was more tactical than religious. Sounds par for the course for the CIA. It would be very convenient if it were actually true. What I find curious is that the CIA simultaneously believed that Sunni terrorists would not cooperate with Shia terrorists because of ideology. It would seem hard to believe both these mistaken but contradictory beliefs at the same time, yet the CIA managed. The article would be interesting if the whole thing didn't have the smell of another CIA revisionist history.