[Mohammed El-Shahawi]

I think these Q&As realy frame the dawn of a new strategic doctrine nicely. It's utterly amazing that nobody else in the world (with the exception of Tony Blair) has caught on to this.

[okie01]

"It's utterly amazing that nobody else in the world (with the exception of Tony Blair) has caught on to this."

For what it's worth, which isn't much, I believe Italy's Berlusconi has caught on, as well.

But, then, his mind isn't clouded by elitist Euro-socialism, either.

[Mitchell]

I think these Q&As realy frame the dawn of a new strategic doctrine nicely. It's utterly amazing that nobody else in the world (with the exception of Tony Blair) has caught on to this.

Do you mean outside the U.S., or are you including the U.S. government here? I think that Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz are well aware of these issues. Powell, on the other hand, acts like he's not convinced that we're at this point yet. I'm not sure where Rice stands -- I suspect with Rumsfeld, et al.

One unfortunate consequence of the propping up of the domestic nut anthrax-mailing theory is that public discussion of these strategic issues has been muffled. After all, the anthrax mailings are the visible evidence that this isn't just speculation for the future, that we have already reached the end of the road for MAD and must look at new strategic doctrines. As a result, all such discussions end up getting diverted into the question of whether the anthrax sender was foreign or domestic (which is itself a euphemism for the question of whether it was a military foray or a crime), rather than the question of how best to deal with the new realities.