From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hindsight. Everyone thought that he had them back then. A prudent person
would have to think he had them based on the evidence and his actions at the
time. From what I've read, he may have even thought he had them. I
certainly
wouldn't want to have to tell him that we didn't have any.
Too many he's in this paragraph.
Lets not be like others on this list and move to insulting versus answering
the question or raising a point...
But I think I would be answering it
when I say that Bush fails to understand that while authority can be
delegated responsibility cannot. Even now he does not accept
responsibility. In a president, that's terrifying.
Not sure what responsibility you are referring to. And while I might come
to agree with you if you explained your point, accepting or not accepting
responsibility this has nothing to do with the question at hand.
Again, it really all depends on your perspective and which items you take
as
"fact" and which as "guessing".
It would seem so
Finally, we agree on something. <g>
Have a good night.
Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Ousterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. Is the US being seriously threatened?
2. Is a vital US interest at stake?
3. Will we commit sufficient resources to win?
4. Are the objectives clearly defined?
5. Will we sustain the commitment?
6. Is there reasonable expectation that the public and Congress will
support
the operation?
7. Have we exhausted our other
options?________________________________________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
