Of course I understand relveance. Greenspan was a major economic personality - he’s commenting on economic motives for the war.Look, the point that you and the other fellow was trying to make is that Greenspan’s testimony is proof positive that the US went to war to secure oil. My point is that Greenspan was not in the position to know, one way or the other, more about the situation that I or you know about the reasons why Bush favored war with Iraq. You have no idea what “relevance” means.
Nor is Greenspan in the position to know for sure whether the Bush administration’s motivations were primarily economic or not since…as stated ad nauseum, he was not in a position to know.Of course I understand relveance. Greenspan was a major economic personality - he’s commenting on economic motives for the war.
Your attempt to remove him from the ‘decision process’ doesn’t mean he’s not a qualified commentator at all.
That’s to assume that no one not in government may know what government knowsNor is Greenspan in the position to know for sure whether the Bush administration’s motivations were primarily economic or not since…as stated ad nauseum, he was not in a position to know.
Yes…and for the most part that is a correct assumption.That’s to assume that no one not in government may know what government knows
Then you might as well live in North Korea and accept what the government tells you.Yes…and for the most part that is a correct assumption.
Nope. Just because you can’t know everything important that happens within the government does not mean that the government is oppressive. Do you know everything that is going on in the Australian cabinet? Should you? Of course not. A completely transparent government is an ineffective government.Then you might as well live in North Korea and accept what the government tells you.
Well you assume that Greenspan who’s an econonomics giant of that administration knows nothing about the administration - as far as this decision.Nope. Just because you can’t know everything important that happens within the government does not mean that the government is oppressive. Do you know everything that is going on in the Australian cabinet? Should you? Of course not. A completely transparent government is an ineffective government.
Again, you misunderstand the role of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve’s Chairman are NOT members or part of the President’s administration.Well you assume that Greenspan who’s an econonomics giant of that administration knows nothing about the administration - as far as this decision.
But they do work closely with the administration.Again, you misunderstand the role of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve’s Chairman are NOT members or part of the President’s administration.
I don’t at all. I understand he’s separate. What you seem to believe, based only on your say so is that he wouldn’t have a clue what’s going on in the Administration because he’s formally not part of it.Again, you misunderstand the role of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve’s Chairman are NOT members or part of the President’s administration.
Exactly. They deal with members of government all the time.But they do work closely with the administration.
Alan Greenspan knew what was going on, and he knew that the Iraq war was all about oil. Take a look at Iraq’s oil reserves and it is obvious that this was a reason for the war.rr1213 is creating in effect a false dichotomy; separating Greenspan from the ebb and flow of government business.
If he’s getting his info from the tube he doesn’t know anything more than you or I do…I don’t at all. I understand he’s separate. What you seem to believe, based only on your say so is that he wouldn’t have a clue what’s going on in the Administration because he’s formally not part of it.
Whilst there in his office he mustn’t have had any contact with anyone in government. He mustn’t have looked at any economic papers of the government, nor even switched on the tv to see what was going on - with members of government saying what they thought, etc.
That’s how weirdly constructed your ideas about the “Isolation of Greenspan” must be
Ah, if only the world was so simple. Go ahead darling and believe what you want to believe.Alan Greenspan knew what was going on, and he knew that the Iraq war was all about oil. Take a look at Iraq’s oil reserves and it is obvious that this was a reason for the war.
Yep, pretty much. I’ve seen it plenty of times…items I’ve worked on personally–so I know what is truly happening–and the reporters get it all wrong. Quite common.What about reporters? They’re not in government. By rr1213 's idea, they’re all a bunch of clueless people, every one of them
You beat me to it. That’s what I was going to say to you (sans the darling bit). You’ve offered only your suppose-so that it must be true.Ah, if only the world was so simple. Go ahead darling and believe what you want to believe.