> Stalin perfected the argument that "if there's no evidence, it proves
> they're guilty, because they're hiding it." But even he had more shame
> than to go this far -- to say that even if they were innocent they were
> guilty for making us suspect them and therefore deserved to be crushed.
>
> > The real story here is less about the failure of intelligence,
> > inspections or diplomacy than about the end of America's tolerance for
> > state-sponsored ambiguities explicitly designed to threaten American
> > lives.
>
> In other circles, state sponsored ambiguity is called diplomacy. And
> don't get me started on nuclear doctrines.
>
> Who is this nutcase Schrage? Is this really the Post and the not the
> Washington Times?
>
> When the game theory nuts start coming out, we really have regressed
back
> to the classical era of the cold war.
>
> Michael
====================
It's really the WP. Schrage has been writing on technology-science policy stuff for quite a while for them and used to write regularly for Technology Review [don't know if he still does, I quit reading it when they gave up what critical capacities they had when the 'new economy' began it's rise to stardom]. "Diplomacy is dead and we have killed it..........."
Ian