Still I am not sure whether the question is if it would be crazy to use a tactical nuke (or stupid or a "miscalculation") or if the current administration is that crazy/stupid/inept. It would seem the answers are yes and maybe, but I am not sure what the overall strategy is of the first one or how capable these planners are in working through the tactics of anything more than a hearty game of beer pong. As in that game, this one seems to make your aim and thinking worse the more you lose. Eventually you just start pelting the ball to see if you can hit something: this almost never works, but it seems like a good idea at the time. Who knows, maybe you'll win: there's always a chance, right?
-s
> Doug wrote to Marvin:
> <blockquote>
>>I also think it's mistaken to consider the invasion of Iraq an act of
>>"stupidity" so much as of miscalculation
>
> Almost everyone who knew anything about Iraq predicted what would
> happen if the US invaded, and the Bush admin ignored or fired them.
> Miscalculation seems too kind a word for that.
>
> Doug
>
> That sounds like revisionism, Doug! Even on LBO-talk, for a _long_
> time, those who thought that Washington could and should provide
> "security" for Iraqis, "reconstruct" Iraq, "prevent" a civil war, etc.
> were a majority. Look into the archived threads on Iraq from 2003
> till at least early 2004.
>
> --
> Yoshie
> <http://montages.blogspot.com/>
> <http://mrzine.org>
> <http://monthlyreview.org/>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>