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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lorrie coey who wrote (23666)	12/21/1998 5:26:00 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 67261

Totally irrelevant to the post I made but thanks for sharing some more of your loony tunes with us. JLA

To: lorrie coey who wrote (23666)	12/21/1998 5:35:00 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Some insight into Clinton's decision to attack Iraq. It was aboard Air Force One that Clinton confronted what had become his simultaneous preoccupation: Iraq. Later that afternoon, he took part in an hour-long onboard conference call with Vice President Gore and a group of foreign policy advisers that included National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Defense Secretary William Cohen, CIA Director George Tenet and General Henry Shelton, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In the call, discussion focused first on the report that would be delivered later that day by Richard Butler, chairman of UNSCOM, the U.N. special commission that oversees weapons inspections in Iraq. In scathing terms, Butler would say that the "full cooperation" that Saddam had promised on Nov. 15, in the face of an earlier military buildup against him, had turned out to be a sham. The group quickly agreed that air strikes were the right option. But Clinton decided he would wait to see Butler's actual report before giving the go order. Before the call ended, there was a second discussion, this time about what Berger carefully described as "any other factors that should lead us to do anything differently." What he meant was the certainty of a political storm in Washington about the timing of the attacks. Despite the President's notorious ability to compartmentalize, holding one set of problems separate in his mind from another, there were no compartments so airtight that they could keep him from noticing that a bombing campaign--even a well-justified one--would both point up the dignity of his role as Commander in Chief and perhaps also slow the impeachment vote. So Clinton did virtually all the talking. According to one participant in the call, the President concluded that if it was necessary to go forward with the assaults for national security reasons, then it would be impossible to explain how he could refuse to order the attacks because of potential political fallout. cnn.com

To: lorrie coey who wrote (23666)	12/21/1998 6:22:00 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 67261

<<The fledgling men's movement divided...in the early and late 80s—into four disparate wings, most of which limped along, leading nowhere.>> Now I'm a mean spirited misogamist republican but I wonder which group I fit into. Treat women the same as I treat a guy. The ones you can't trust, avoid. The one you can trust are your friends. Out of six people that wanted to manage some of my farm land I hired a woman and her daughter because I trusted them the most. Also the daughter can drive a combine like Jeff Gorden drives a race car.