Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

Lovely. Draft, anybody? You send your kid first! No, you! No, YOU!

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by tw

From the BBC of 10 Apr 2006:

Nothing new here, from the French and British experiences, we see that terrorism can occur over decades. What pisses me off is that the adminstrations is still trying to equate the war in Iraq with the War on Terror. Noone there will admit that the War on Terror is about a worldwide network of terror cells and never had anything to do with regime change in Iraq.

Also, that as far as terror and insurgency go, the French ended up giving up in Algeria and that violence in Northern Ireland has been ongoing for 80 years.

In most cases, occupation caused more violence instead of helping to quell it.

[xoxoxoBruce]

C'mon Rich, how does the "french giving up", mean anything, anywhere.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

C'mon Rich, how does the "french giving up", mean anything, anywhere.

Concepts are similar to why we have an illegal immigration problem. Eliminate a reason for a problem AND that problem goes away. As long as Britain insisted on imposing a solution on Northern Ireland rather than work for a solution, then that problem persisted. Once Sen Mitchell arrived - and the Brits were furious about having negotiations ongoing - then a diplomatic solution replaced terrorism. Once the French stopped imposing a brute force solution in N Africa, then violence was no longer necessary. Once the Israelis were talking to Palestinians (and a solution appeared promising - Oslo Accords), then all terrorism stopped.

An inverse example. Once Zionist extremists came to power - called for and even got the assasination of Peres - terminated the Oslo Accords - then Sharon got what he wanted - Intafada II - plenty of violence.

The purpose of war is to return to diplomacy. When diplomacy does not work, then war is not just possible - but essential. Exactly why we teach Americans 'lessons of history' so that American leaders can not lie and so that diplomacy gets the respect it deserves. Whooops. Maybe others besides Urbane Guerilla did not first read the Pentagon Papers.

A wonderful example of how diplomacy works was the Balkans. Containment. Negotiation. Selective use of force. Economic pressure. The problem in Serbia literally negotiated himself out of a job - without any invasion of Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia, etc. Holbrook literally talked Milosevik into surrender. It's all about identifying and then negotiating a problem out of existence. Violence - ie terrorism - only when leaders fail to perform their job.

Nations with great leaders don't need 20 years of violence and warfare to fix problems. And once the locals (Eurpoeans) could not do that job in the Balkans, only then did the Americans enter resulting in far less loss of life.

How many people had to die uselessly in Northern Ireland before the powers that be decided to stop following violent men and instead address the problem.

[Ibby]

tw...

Political leaning isn't simple left/right. It's a circle. And you are so far left that you are coming around on the right.

Yes, the Bush administration is grossly inept. Yes, they broke the law and are getting away with it. Yes, the war is going to hell. But anyone who can arrive at that conclusion by themselves doesn't wanna hear you rant on about it for 13 pages, and anyone who can't isn't going to be persuaded by you saying 'mental midget', 'deja vue (sic)', and 'rush limbaugh' a hundred times. Give it a rest already, man.

[wolf]

I don't agree with you or anything, but man! 15 posts in and you already have a total understanding of he who is tw. Sharp, dude.

I have to say that I find tw's tenacity on this subject rather amazing, myself. I think we can safely say that tw is not overly fond of W.

[tw]

Originally Posted by marichiko

I have to say that I find tw's tenacity on this subject rather amazing, myself. I think we can safely say that tw is not overly fond of W.

A president earns respect. He does not deserve it especially when he lies repeatedly for a political agenda - when America is only secondary to his agenda. He undermined the Oslo Accords as a Norwegian foreign minister predicted. He almost got us in a hot war with mainland China over some silly spy plane. Where does this earn respect. Emotion has nothing to do with a president that is factually incompetent.

I meant the assiniation of Rabin - not Perez who then became Prime Minister after Rabin was assinated as called for by Israeli extremists.

Originally Posted by tw

A president earns respect. He does not deserve it especially when he lies repeatedly for a political agenda - when America is only secondary to his agenda. He undermined the Oslo Accords as a Norwegian foreign minister predicted. He almost got us in a hot war with mainland China over some silly spy plane. Where does this earn respect. Emotion has nothing to do with a president that is factually incompetent.

tw, I'm with you 100%. I should have clarified my comment to say that my amazement is equally divided between your tenacity and the way W continues to add fuel to the fire. Its not like W made a little mistake here or there and learned his lesson. Like the energizer bunny, he keeps going and going and adding to his debacle of a presidency. I don't think even Nixon was as bad!

[tw]

60 Minutes interviews a retired CIA officer who provided the White House with its intelligence.

A Spy Speaks Out
A CIA official who had a top role during the run-up to the Iraqi war charges the White House with ignoring intelligence that said there were no weapons of mass destruction or an active nuclear program in Iraq.

The former highest ranking CIA officer in Europe, Tyler Drumheller, also says that while the intelligence community did give the White House some bad intelligence, it also gave the White House good intelligence — which the administration chose to ignore.

Of course, most are finally acknowledging what should have been obvious years ago. However that personal speculation is not sufficient. Supporting facts of even obvious conclusions must be learned. Even things obvious need detailed supportig facts.

A top CIA officer is speaking publicly about the obvious - how incompetently the White House handled intelligence. Just knowing that they did so is not sufficient. Informed Americans need these testimonies.

George Jr insisted intelligence agencies got it all wrong - an outright lie - blame others. What does an MBA then do? Create more layers of bureaucracy. George Jr's solution to stifling Federal Investigations that could have uncovered 11 Sept was Fatherland Security - more bureaucracy. To promote his myths that intelligence was flawed, he created a Director of National Intelligence - as if the CIA did not do that job. The New York Times of 19 April 2006 demonstrates what that bureaucracy has done:

In New Job, Spymaster Draws Bipartisan Criticism
The top Republican and the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee have disagreed publicly about many things, but on one issue they have recently come together. Both are disquieted by the first-year performance of John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence. ...

In an April 6 report, the Intelligence Committee warned that Mr. Negroponte's office could end up not as a streamlined coordinator but as "another layer of large, unintended and unnecessary bureaucracy." The committee went so far as to withhold part of Mr. Negroponte's budget request until he convinced members he had a workable plan.

Of course this is what MBAs do when they don't have grasp of how the work gets done - hire more subordinates - create more layers of bureaucracy.

Meanwhile other problems are being created by these bureacracy layers - a problem that would not exist under the previous and less bureaucratic system:

Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, who played a central role in devising the intelligence overhaul, said she was worried about what she said was Mr. Negroponte's failure to confront the Defense Department over an aggressive grab for turf over the past year. ...

In particular, she said she believed that Mr. Negroponte should have responded more assertively to a Pentagon directive last November that appeared to assert control over the National Security Agency, which does electronic eavesdropping; the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which takes satellite and aerial photos; and the National Reconnaissance Office, which launches and operates spy satellites. All are part of the Defense Department.

"While those agencies are hosted in the Pentagon, they report to the D.N.I.," Ms. Collins said. "I think the directive confused the relationship and weakened the D.N.I."

Which comes to another thread - the agenda of Rumsfeld - his "my way or the highway" attitude. No mystery that Rumsfeld wants intelligence functions moved into Pentagon's control. But that's another story.

These reports are about a White House that distorts intelligence for political agenda, then blames others, and then builds bureaucratic structures. As if bureaucracy will solve a competence problem; a president who lies for a political agenda. There was no intelligence failure. That intelligence failure is a mental midget who would even out a CIA agent to maintain his myths.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by tw

A president earns respect.

He's earned mine.

He almost got us in a hot war with mainland China over some silly spy plane. . . Where does this earn respect.

No he didn't. No almost about it: all parties concerned remained calm. Read some detailed accounts of the aerial collision of the P-3 and F-9 over the South China Sea, and learn more than you knew. Somehow, your take on this continues to reinforce my understanding that you are a communist.

Punctuation is as in the original. If you cannot punctuate a simple question, tw, you cannot remotely hope for respect. You (you idiot), refuse to earn any, so perhaps if you want public attention, you might try removing your trousers, seating yourself, deeply, atop a splintery fence post, and rotating at better than 128 rpm for over an hour.

Getting your freak on would be more constructive than the wrongheaded logorrhea you indulge in here. Good thing you make communism look stupid, though.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

He's earned mine.

What can I say to that except that some people are bought more cheaply than others.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

. . .and anyone who can't isn't going to be persuaded by you saying 'mental midget', 'deja vue (sic)', and 'rush limbaugh' a hundred times. Give it a rest already, man.

He can't. The man's mad, in addition to having his grasp of reality amputated by his communist beliefs. He's not a communist because I called him one -- the evidence, out of his own writing, is not merely clear, it is blatant.

[Ibby]

...For every liberal wacko, there's a conservative nutjob.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

He's talking trash about people who aren't present. Not that I ain't doing the same...