Replies

Do we have any takers for the theory that the anthrax letters were actually a US-sponsored terrorist attack on itself?

Not here. I don't disagree with you one bit about where the anthrax came from. But I do disagree about Bush's willingness to do something about it. Everything I see in Bush's behavior tells me that this is a big-picture guy who can see where this leads if he leaves it to fester. My read is that this guy will take the hit now -- however bad it might be -- than literally doom the United States.

I think the reason Saddam is still alive 18 months after knocking down our buildings is that it has taken 18 months to figure how to do this in a way that minimizes the risk of getting some 6- or 7-figure number of Americans killed. As you very correctly point out, this is a highly dangerous thing to try to do. It has to be executed on about six levels -- here, in Iraq, on the seas, in the air -- at a very high level of precision, and all at once... or all Hell will break loose.

But my reading of Bush is that he will do the thing that Clinton would not do: he will confront the damned thing and get it out of our future... because that's just the kind of guy he is.

I may well die in the thing; I live about five miles from the White House. We'll all know soon enough. I don't think it's weeks away; I think it's sooner than that. I think surprise has to be part of it, and this long minuet we're doing with the aircraft carriers and the troop movements and the UN inspectors is eye candy that will not run to scheduled completion.

Concerning GS's predictions, I am agnostic. I think the issue between ND and GS boils down to timing. I take GS to believe that Bush will do something about the blackmail before his first term expires, though he sometimes waffles on that. I am less sanguine that we will be able to transform this game of chicken into something a lot safer in several months. I do agree that Bush is not going to punt this problem to his successor as Clinton did. So, I expect he will continue to escalate the pressure in pursuit of an outcome where Saddam swerves. That's the way a game of chicken works, and that's what we're playing right now. So, another level of GS's theory has to do with his predictions. He's had an impressive record so far, and he convinced me in 2002 there would be no attack then. I'm less convinced there will be no attack in 2003. Whatever we do, whether action or inaction, we are risking disaster. There's just no way around that.