Quagmire
Ted Kennedy and Donald Rumsfeld exchanged one liners over whether Iraq was an American win or an insurgent victory. The Australian Broadcast Corporation reports:
TED KENNEDY: Secretary Rumsfeld, as you know, we are in serious trouble in Iraq, and this war has been consistently and grossly mismanaged, and we are now in a seemingly intractable quagmire. Our troops are dying, and there really is no end in sight.
DONALD RUMSFELD: Well, that is quite a statement. First, let me say that there isn't a person at this table who agrees with you that we're in a quagmire, and that there's no end in sight. The suggestion by you that people – me or others – are painting a rosy picture is false. I think that the comments you made are certainly yours to make, and I don't agree with them.
TED KENNEDY: Well, my time has just expired, but Mr Secretary, I'm talking about the misjudgements and the mistakes that have been made, the series which I've mentioned. Those are on your watch. Isn't it time for you to resign?
DONALD RUMSFELD: Senator, I have offered my resignation to the President twice, and he's decided that he would prefer that he not accept it. And that's his call.
Carl Levin and John Abizaid had exchanges of their own. From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation again.
CARL LEVIN: General Abizaid, can you give us your assessment of the strength of the insurgency. Is it less strong, more strong, about the same strength as it was six months ago?
JOHN ABIZAID: Senator, I'd say…
CARL LEVIN: Could you put the mic right in front of you?
JOHN ABIZAID: In terms of comparison from six months ago, in terms of foreign fighters, I believe there are more foreign fighters coming into Iraq than there were six months ago. In terms of the overall strength of the insurgency, I'd say it's about the same as it was.
CARL LEVIN: So you wouldn't agree with the statement that it's 'in its last throes'?
JOHN ABIZAID: I don't know that I would make any comment about that, other than to say there's a lot of work to be done against the insurgency.
CARL LEVIN: Well, the Vice-President has said it's in its last throes. That's the statement that the Vice President. Doesn't sound to me from your testimony, or any other testimony here this morning, that it is in its last throes.
JOHN ABIZAID: I'm sure you'll forgive me from criticising the Vice-President.
CARL LEVIN: I just want an honest assessment from you as to whether you agree with a particular statement of his, it's not personal. I just want to know whether you agree with that assessment. It's not a personal attack on him, any more than if he says that something is a fact and you disagree with it, we would expect you to say you disagree with it.
JOHN ABIZAID: I gave you my opinion of where we are.
So just where are we? From that set of exchanges above, we get the following headlines. General, Cheney at odds on Iraq, Iraq insurgency still strong, general says, Iraq war an 'intractable quagmire': Ted Kennedy, 'US not losing in Iraq'. One would think then, that we are on the Eve of Destruction. The Washington Post reports:
Abizaid noted that while confidence among U.S. forces in the field "has never been higher," the political mood in Washington appears strikingly different. "I've never seen the lack of confidence greater," he said. ... Rumsfeld and the other military authorities attempted to present a picture of considerable progress in Iraq across not only military but also political and economic fronts. They said that despite a rise in enemy attacks since earlier this year, the number remains at about the same level as a year ago and at only about half of previous peaks. They said Iraqi security forces are becoming more capable, and Iraqi opinion polls showed more confidence in the forces and in the interim government. Additionally, Iraqi political authorities remain on track to draft a new constitution and elect a new national government by the end of the year, they said.
We are probably in politics as usual. Here's the money quote from the Post. "There appeared to be little support on either the Senate or House armed services committees for setting a timetable to withdraw U.S. troops." There would be lots of support for a withdrawal timetable if there were any substantial sense the US was being defeated. Then the discussion in the Senate moved on to a subject which indicated, in a backhanded way, where the Senators really thought things were going.
Arguing that something needs to be done to "change the current dynamic in Iraq," Levin suggested added pressure on Iraqi authorities to keep to their schedule for a new constitution and national elections by warning them that failure would cause the United States "to rethink our presence there."
Levin's (D-Mich.) question accidentally suggested that there was a causal relationship between an American presence and a future Iraqi constitution and national elections, which would in turn imply that without OIF there would be no constitution and no elections. Well, you can't have your cake and eat it, too.
posted by wretchardthecat at 6/24/2005 03:50:00 AM
214 Comments:
"Well, you can't have your cake and eat it, too.
"
---
If you are Carl Levin, you can think you can.
And this enables you to come off as an insulting, boorish, ass.
If you are despondent over aborted attempts to commit suicide by banging your head against a brick wall, just listen to ten minutes of Teddy, (mp3 file link below) then try again.
. Kennedy's QUAGMIRE .
It would be so great to be Rummy: The definition of unflappable.
If we are in an "intractable quagmire" now because we are fighting the war, what were we in during the '90's when we weren't fighting back?
It's not as if we don't know the results of the opposite strategy that we pursued then.
The height of irony is having half the Democrats calling for Karl Rove's resignation because he described them as weak in the war on terror, on the very same day another bunch of them are bleating defeatist sentiments in this hearing.
Here's a quote on how to go to war from today's Daily Kos:
"Democrats
Believe that we should be honest with our troops about the reasons we go to war, give them everything they need to be safe, and make sure we go in with an exit plan."
No comment necessary.
Our exit plan consists of Victory.
The real question is what constitutes Victory? On this matter there is much debate. What is the REAL scope and purpose of the WoT. Where will it take US in the next 12 to 18 mpnths.
If the President does not lead the people can not follow.
If Levin and Kennedy weren't so nauseating, I might be able to muster a chuckle or two at their cynical stupidity. I might speculate that a patient could be dying of an incurable disease. Assuming that a "relative health scale" existed, Dr. Cheney might assign the patient a 2 with 10 being robust health. Dr. Cheney might comment that the patient is in his last throes and will surely die in a matter of months. Worried family ask the medical team about the patient. Another doctor comments that he's about the same as he was six months ago--that is terrible.
Dan, you're firing on all eight cylinders this morning (not that you don't always!).
Yes, if you do enough weeding in the garden of news, you find that when a DC Dem is cornered as to "how" the Dems would exit, you will always hear a re-worded description of the administration's strategy, framed as if it were an alternate, a diametric opposition.
Fundamental dishonesty, arrived at conspiratorially, and aimed at everything from diversion (acutely, the Dems & the 90s UN), to obfuscation of that cursed pile of factual material that sits there steaming in the middle of reality.
"Don't believe Your Lyin' Eyes!" advises the great Senator Kennedy.
NEWS FLASH!
Stung by citicism of the Gitmo facility, the DoD has announced plans to phase out use of the prison.
The detainees will be transferred one by one to Aruba, where recent research has shown that they will simply disappear without a trace.
Dan wrote:
"Like our friend Ash--how can anyone POSSIBLY think this is a "war for oil"? Why? Was it threatened before? Couldn't we just buy it?"
Sure we can just buy it, but who profits from that transaction is what is at issue. They have it, we need it, and so does China and the rest of the world. So we compete for purchasing that oil, the runup in price and the profits go to them that has the oil. What part of that equation do you have trouble with. Do you want to fill Saddam's, the Mad Mullahs, and the Saudi royality with our hard earned treasure? How can we get our share of those profits, why by having our companies work and profit from those fields. It'll be even tougher to get some of those profits if the Chinese own our oil companies, but that is (sort of) another story.
On terrorism. So many of you folks treat it as 'the enemy', as if it was some monolithic force with a command and control center that must be confronted militarily, and that it can be defeated militarily. But terrorism is not like that, it is a tactic, and the users of terror tactics are many and varied.
terrorism ... as if it was some monolithic force with a command and control center that must be confronted militarily ...
I'm thinking that if we just nuked that monolithic black rock in Saudi Arabia, that would go a long way towards taking out both command and control of Wahhabism, which is the foundation of 99% of today's terrorism. From a confrontational military point of view.
So, Ash, who has been planning and executing the thirty-odd years of terrorist acts which finally brought forth the western military response (the military response that as a by-product will indeed eventually divert oil profits from financing jihad)?
Has it been Halliburton all along?
It's been said many times here that terrorism is a tactic and a more accurate description of what we're up against is Islamofascism. And since this is a war for oil, $60 for a barrel of crude is clear evidence that we're losing. I am surprised that Senator "Chappy" didn't fling that gawd-honest fact at Mr. Rumsfeld.
Nathan, if it is understood, then how does it follow that taking out Iraq, Iran, Syria, and the Saudi's will stem terrorism? The invading and occupying of Iraq seems to have increased terrorism and I fail to see how striking any of these other countries will decrease terrorism. It would be counterproductive in that such a radical action would provoke more radicalism. Unless you buy the line that there is command and control and the Iranian government, or Syrian government, or Saudi government exercise that control, then taking them out would stem terrorism.
buddy said: Dan, you're firing on all eight cylinders this morning (not that you don't always!).
Yuck! I would hope not! Even the Baycrest geriatric crowd down in Florida avoid those hulking pieces of scrap metal. Buddy, you need to stop with those veiled insults. It's unbecoming of a Belmont. And Dan, you're better than those antiquated American clunkers.
Blackford Oakes, back when you were being directed by William F. Buckley, you had a greater appreciation for the physical fact of sequence, in the unfolding of history.
Ted Kennedy's Quagmire
Were are well into a propaganda war as Wretchard's excerpts show. The left is now in a desperate position. They are fighting their own political Vietnam. Ted Kennedy's transparent debating tricks are sinking him further into his self-made quagmire.
[The start with a false premise and go to a false conclusion trick]
TED KENNEDY: Secretary Rumsfeld, as you know, we are in serious trouble in Iraq...
[Rumsfeld does not fall for the trick]
DONALD RUMSFELD: Well, that is quite a statement. First, let me say that there isn't a person at this table who agrees with you...
[The classic "I out of time but not out of words" trick]
TED KENNEDY: Well, my time has just expired, but Mr Secretary... the misjudgements and the mistakes...
And, so it goes. Ted "My car is stuck in the river" Kennedy never misses a cheap shot at his opponent. He is quite a case study in base debating tricks. He is like an aged attack hound who can only bite his victim with soggy gums. He has been reduced to making growling sounds a wetting his victim's leg with saliva.
This is a far cry from his golden days of mentoring John Kerry on speeches before the Senate during the Vietnam war. I suspect we will see new actors follow the Vietnam/quagmire script - complete with televised antiwar protests before this is over.
You got it Buffy! Disappearing those "clerics", where ever they are, should have been Priority Number One from Day One of the war. If they are venerated clerics, then Gobbels was the Pope.
Let's send them to "Aruba."
I'm a little suprised that we have not covertly hosted a Wahabbist Worldwide Conference where an Unfortunate Accident could occur.
To expand on Peter UK's point, if there are growing numbers of foreign fighters coming into Iraq, but the "insurgency" is about as strong as it was six months ago, then the domestic aspect of the "insurgency" is withering. It's becoming an invasion.
Granted, it's time to give up trying to get the MSM to call the "insurgents" by their real name (terrorists), but maybe we can get them to dissemble in a little differently. How about promoting "outsurgents"?
What's wrong with the Turbo V-8 New Mustang?
While I agree Dan is firing on all 8, (and that he almost always is) and disagree w/mika that there is anything wrong with that, you did seem to miss one not so fine point, Dan:
"Or Senator Kennedy--let's just say you're right:"
---
It seems the answer is obvious,
Ted would say, ok:
Rummy should resign, (he asked him when he could expect it - more than once.)
and
GWB should be impeached.
Mika,
I drive a four cylinder vehicle,
but really,
a Peugeout?
PLEASE !
Christopher Hitchens states the obvious:
Conspiracy Theories
If you liked The Da Vinci Code, you'll love the Downing Street memo.
"I am now forced to wonder: Who is there who does not know that the Bush administration decided after September 2001 to change the balance of power in the region and to enforce the Iraq Liberation Act, passed unanimously by the Senate in 1998, which made it overt American policy to change the government of Iraq? This was a fairly open conspiracy, and an open secret. Given that everyone from Hans Blix to Jacques Chirac believed that Saddam was hiding weapons from inspectors, it made legal sense to advance this case under the banner of international law and to treat Saddam "as if" (and how else?) his strategy of concealment and deception were prima facie proof. The British attorney general—who has no jurisdiction in these 50 states—was worried that "regime change" alone would not be a sufficient legal basis. One appreciates his concern. But the existence of the Saddam regime was itself a defiance of all known international laws, and we had before us the consequences of previous failures to act, in Bosnia and Rwanda, where action would have been another word for "regime change."
He doesn't even mention that our "failure to act" in the 90's, in response to public declarations of war and multiple acts of war against us, led to the trillion dollar attack on 9/11.
So after sitting around, watching Al Qaeda openly mobilizing in Afghanistan for years, after 9/11 we were supposed to continue the absurd combat air patrols over Iraq while enforcing the Oil for Food disaster?
Piffle.
Our strategy is wacked, focusing on procedures and not on substantive political goods like security.
http://www.affbrainwash.com/chrisroach/index.php#020003
Doug, that's me daddy's car. I drive a 2004 Civic, if that's any consolation. :P
Doug Said: What's wrong with the Turbo V-8 New Mustang?
Anyone driving a Ford probably deserves it. :D
PeterUK wrote:
"Ash is simply wrong on the subject of oil,it would have been easier to cut a deal with Saddam, turned a blind eye to his actions and collected the cut price oil vouchers, which allowed recipients to buy under world market prices."
I have to disagree with you here Peter. Prior to the invasion there was no easy way nor an inclination to 'cut a deal' with Saddam for the oil. One, he wasn't too keen on dealing with the US - France and Russia were preferred, two, it was illegal under US law to do it, and 3, if we did change the laws and do bidness with him, he would be amassing power quickly - which is why we went to war in the first place; that blasted WMD issue. So, no, just buying his oil wasn't a viable option for the Bush administration.
nathan wrote:
"The invading and occupying of Iraq seems to have increased terrorism
Worldwide? Or only in Iraq, the newest and most popular final terrorist destination?"
There is an interest Terrorism Knowledge base - http://www.tkb.org/Home.jsp - which allows you to graph out the stats according to your own criteria. I did a analysis factoring out Iraq for all the years available and I got a graph which looked like:
Terror Attacks per year
This shows a clear increase in terrorism in recent years even not including Iraq.
And yes Nathan I am familiar with the dysfunctional Arab states and their propensity to claim to be victims. The US also uses its victim hood as a rationale for its actions (primarily 911). It is not at all clear to me that the remedy for the dysfunctional states in the Middle East is for the US to invade, occupy, and try to impose a democratic government. We love to go on about how democracy must be learned, earned, and fed the blood of patriots. We cannot bestow it upon them. We can help and encourage but not force feed. This is counterproductive to our goals of achieving democracy.
Dan, please don’t paint me with your Black and White brush. The lib/dems in the States offer little help toward offering solutions to our Iraq problem. I am also a big fan of free trade. I raise the China bugaboo about China and Oil because of the recent Chinese offer for UNOCAL. All forms of hand wringing are starting and it will probably put the US oil dependency and nationalist tendencies in stark relief.
You ask why I am so stuck on the economic argument. It is because the Bush administration seems particularly driven by economics (gutting environmental protections so as to not impede growth is one example) and the crusade against terrorism rings false. Invading and occupying Iraq because of terror is silly. There are plenty of sources for terrorism and Iraq was far down the list. Bush also listed WMD as the main reason, terror, freedom, liberty, were all accents on the main theme. WMD and the desire to obtain them. This power Saddam had was derived through economics, the economics of his oil wealth.
Ash,
Have you tried here:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/forumdisplay.php?s=d21648dcb179c5f5d8666258ef34bbb6&forumid=17
Btw, all things considered, that 1300cc 304 model was a very peppy car from what I remember, Doug. It was also a light car and had high ground clearance. Given the road conditions at the time, and where it was driven, me thinks me dad could easily have done worse.
But, you're right, Doug. A Peugeout?!!
(Sexy headlights, no?)
1300cc 304
Didn't take into account how long ago that was:
France might not even have been fomenting Israel's destruction at the time?
Ted Exits the Scene
PeterUK,
Was the war illegal? Loads of technicalities in the arguments. Now if only we had a forum in which to adjucate such questions.
Yep, oil is used in so many things. In the US we have a strong notion of 'ownership rights' (recent Supreme court ruling casts an interesting shadow on this but I digress) Anyway, we are big on private ownership and the rights that come with it. 'They' own the oil, and with it come the attendant rights. We've got to learn to deal with it, or change our notion of ownership. The future of fresh water looms ominous on the horizon...look out Canada ;)
nathan, are you addressing those questions to me? They are perfectly valid, and I can live with hostility if it is expressed, though I don't perceive it in your question...though it is a loaded one ;)
If it was addressed to me, are asking regarding moving forward as to opposed to what should we have done?
Once seen in its strategic implications, 9/11 isn't some sort of "excuse" for anything.
Exactly. The premise of this line of thinking is that America doesn't have the right/excuse to do anything, except for specific rights granted to address the specific individuals who caused the damage on 9/11.
Also, for this line of thinking to work, you must slice history into discrete particles, as unrelated as all the blood drops in OJ's truck.
For example, the fact that we have been continuously at war in Iraq, in active combat since 1991, has to be completely forgotten. Ditto the fact that Saddam admitted to making and possessing many tons of WMD's during the sacred inspections regime, and never accounted for their disposition. Forget about that.
Ouch, this hurts to try to think this way.
If we go to war for oil, why didn't we just take over Saudi? We already had military bases, and the infrastructure of the country is fine and dandy. We wrote the owner's manuals to all their defensive systems, so we could have handled the military aspect neatly. If we were so insane to go to war for oil, why the heck did we go for busted up, run down, Number 2? And now that we're there, what the heck are we wasting time in the cities for? They got no oil wells in the city!
Ahh, I'm getting giddy trying to think like a liberal.
Fsst. Who needs their fresh water. It's that trillion-barrel tar pit in Alberta that we should be bothered about. Down with Martin, that Commie bastard! Let's see those Red Mounties deal with that.
I'd love to have one a these--who wouldn't? the great Deux Cheveux! One thousand miles to the gallon at a nice safe three miles per hour. If I was 10 years younger I'd start building them in the garage.
The coolest feature was that the (wicker?) seats came out to use for picnics.
Think the doors came off too, to give a jeeplike effect.
13 hp ?
Doug's dream car:
. Morris .
. Convertible
mezzrow--evil is as evil does?
Doug, no typo, I was Kidding--it'd do 60 I think IIRC. Plus, no parking problems, when you get where you're going you just fold it and put it in your pocket.
Limbaugh,
When I read Saletan's line about Teddy stumping for Kerry, I wished I'd written it myself.
"It's strange that a man who charged into enemy fire should prove so physically inferior, as a politician, to a man whose greatest athletic feat during the Vietnam era was swimming ashore at Chappaquiddick."
I find the focus on oil by some people to be curious, at best and rather disingenuous at least. While I think we need to address issues such as access to oil and the use of alternative technologies, I think the driving factor is not the proper direction of technology, nor economics, or even environmental concerns. Would 9/11/01 have happened if we had no need of the oil in the Middle East? I think the answer certainly is "yes." While the terrorists might - and only might - have had access to less monetary resources, the hatred and cultural conflict that drove the terrorist attacks still would have been there. Indeed, if the people there were worse off, the hatred might have well been even more intense. I think that this emphasis on oil as a reason for our interest in the middle east and the suggestions regarding getting away from are driven by certain people's own recognition that they themselves don't "do" real international relations very well and are all but totally incompetent in matters of national defense. They have decided that if we could just avoid needing the oil, then the problem would go away, and thus they once would be capable of assuming some leadership roles. That is simply absurd. The problem is there and is a result of incompatible attitudes between us of other regarding key issues of human freedom, in all its forms. Would Hitler have been less of a threat of the Third Reich had all the oil and other resources it needed? Hardly! It surely would have been a worse threat. If we figured out how to make oil out of pine straw and dry leaves tomorrow the problem of the Islamic fascist would still be there, and might well be worse. So the strategy of “replace the oil with something else and let them rot in their own hell holes” is perhaps not the same as appeasement – but would have the same ultimately disastrous effect.
OT
THE JOURNAL EDITORIAL REPORTCairo and Tabor Tune in this weekend for a discussion of Condoleezza Rice's Egypt speech and the new taxpayer-rights movement. Friday, June 24, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
Condoleezza Rice tells Egypt and Saudi Arabia that the U.S. now prizes democracy more than stability; plus a special briefing on the taxpayer bill of rights movement brewing in the states.
The program is presented by Thirteen/WNET New York. The more than 300 public TV stations around the country set their program schedules individually, so to find out the day and time when "The Journal Editorial Report" will air near you, please check your local PBS listings or consult the PBS Web site.
. opinionjournal
Sacre Bleu!
Mitterand's secret, which is he didn't like wine.
He never drank spirits and almost never drank wine.
At the state banquets where he held forth, he constantly had his glass filled with -- gasp -- Coca-Cola. So American cultural imperialism is at work, even in France, even under Mitterand."
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/journaleditorialreport/061705/tony.html
Gregory Scoblet replies to,Who's On First?
I'd love to have one a these--who wouldn't?
They have what we call "beach chairs" for seats, strapped down to a floor the thickness of a good tin can.
Their name is a joke on "two horsepower."
blackford oakes,
If, in ten years, we have a division of troops in al-Anbar at a huge air base with a second divisions equipment in ready-to-use shape, does it matter who is "running" Iraq? If we negotiate solid basing rights with the next government I will call the adventure a success. Keeping a division one weeks motormarch from Riyadh, Teheran and Damscus with US air able to reach those capitals in under an hour leaves me content.
I hope for democracy to take root and flourish in Iraq but I do not consider the success of democracy as a strategic end.
I, too, reject the "victimhood" Ash is trying to lay on the US as a result of 9/11. To highlight how very much this concept does NOT fit the situation, try this on for size: Every once in a while, you'll read some Arab pontificator writing about the "humiliation" of America and or Bush as a result of 9/11.
"Humiliation" is a uniquely Arab/Muslim concept, so ingrained in them that they can't imagine anyone else not being "humiliated" by 3,000 dead, too. While Americans (and perhaps Mr. Bush) were enraged, outraged, angry, vindictive and a whole bunch of other emotions, I can say without any fear of contradiction whatsoever that "humiliation" was not and has not been an emotion ANY American has felt as a result of our being bushwacked in that September morning.
The humiliation would have been if we had *not* done something about it afterwards. And since we have taken out two countries to make up for our two buildings, I'm pretty sure that means neither America as an entity nor its individual citizens are feeling victimized.
"...which seems an odd flare of cool realpolitik in the face of a fever."
---
Pretty important to be cool when a wild bunch of Paks would control nuke tipped missiles if things were allowed to get hot.
nathan, to address your question as to what I would do moving forward:
To paraphrase an old saw from memory "Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done" As the sole superpower and the occupier of Iraq with our intentions stated as "we shall act in our own interest" then it is impossible for justice to be seen to be done. Whether justice is done or not is moot. The appearance of our conflicts of interest doom us to forever being labeled as injust arbiters.
As we in the US chose to rise above being simply individuals and then a bunch of separate states we realized that we needed a federal power to mediate competing interests. We need to move in this direction for the world. I am not speaking about something as far reaching as a single world government but we do need a means of mediating competing Sovereign States interests in the world short of the State with the most weapons (either economic or military) dictating outcomes. The ICC is a good place to start. Reforming the UN is also a good place to go.
As far as Iraq goes, if oil is indeed not the mitigating factor, what the hell are we doing still there? At one point the UN offered to take over, the US said no. We need to get the American face off of the administration of Iraq, both militarily and politically. The big fear is if we leave the Baathists will seize power. Maybe, maybe not. If we can get others in, and us out great. If we can't, well, let the chips fall where they may. We goofed up big though, and we should take responsibilty for that.
The Bush administration has got us into the untenable position of propping up a dysfunctional sectarian riven government in Iraq meanwhile expending much blood and treasure for no tangible gain. Mr. Blackford Oakes has expressed this much better then I ever could. We need to extract ourselves from this untenable position.
As far as victimhood goes, simply reflect on what you are saying every time you role out 911 as justification for 'x'.
Blackford Oakes,
A tight basing agreement is nigh on unbreakable so the second part of my statement is non dependent on the type of government in place. I expect to see some binding long term defense agreements prior to the end of Bush's term.
Quite frankly, I don't expect the IA to be given the armor and artillery assets needed to be an offensive force for at least ten years. The Iraqi leadership would be crazy to give an American trained army the tools necessary to overthrow the boys in Baghdad.
I don't see the relationship with Iran getting any tighter either. I understand the links but I can't see the Kurds agreeing with the SCIIRI fellows. What happens if the Kurds run a pipeline out through Turkey?
Spag-oz said...
...IIRC flat strapped it wouldn't budge past 51mph speedo reading.
---
Yeah, but the powerhouse twin carbed 948cc Sprite engine slipped right in for firebreathing racing performance,
...at 37mpg.
Ash,
I bet attacks by the Confederate States of America were on the rise during the Civil War. I bet attacks by the Empire of Japan and Germany rose during WWII as well.
Ash,
Are you serious about the UN taking over? Huh! Seems to me in the Balkans when UN "protected" camps were approached by bad guys the blue helmets ran for the hills and innocents were slaughtered!
Peace is to be found in the grave too.
Nahancee,
Your point on humiliation is well taken. A fellow colleague at the UAE Univesity was in Cairo when the Iran hostage crisis was going down. He said there was tons of disdain being heaped on America for not responding appropriately. He said the Arabs he hung with could not understand why Carter just sat there with that dumb grin on his face.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
La Bona said...
Hi there
Apologies for posting an off topic question here...
---
You said that when you made the identical off topic post before in this thread.
"Like for example why was Moqtada al-Sadr allowed to live in the first months after the war? "
Pure Foolishness?
This Pollyanna army
Bush will not admit that his troops are too exhausted to sustain his vengeful global missions.
Sidney Blumenthal Thursday January 27, 2005 The Guardian
Sidney Blumethal is former senior adviser to President Clinton and author of The Clinton Wars
sidney_blumenthal @yahoo.com
. Hillary Blumenthal
I wonder just exactly how Ash proposes to reform the UN so that it would function well enough to be allowed to judge US actions, and tell us when and how we're allowed to go to war. Not to mention that you just *know* the very first thing such a neo-UN would want to do is to "redistribute the wealth",and I'm damned if I'm going to contribute to any additional French vaction-time.
Would it mean that the Palestinian delegate could veto our aid to Israel or the Africans vote that they receive all their AIDS medications for free from now on or the Chinese could demand that we share our technology and save them the trouble of having to steal it? The UN simply is not gonna fly the way it is currently set up, with hundreds of itty-bitty countries for sale to the highest bidder or the biggest bully.
Second Topic: I really really wish folks would come up with a new boogey-man besides, "what if the Arabs elect Hamas and/or Hizbollah if we give them democracy?" So what? What if they do? We've survived Mao, Stalin, Lenin, and Pol Pot, and I doubt very very much that a bunch of pointy-headed jihadists will be able to outdo those dudes when it comes to unsurvivability or being a nuisance.
But it just seems to me that that psychology involved in voting for Arabs radicals is totally out of whack. If *you* were a newly-enfranchised voter in Iraq, would you be voting for a chicken in every pot and 2 cars in every garage, or would you be voting for which god to pray to on Friday?
I simply cannot believe that Arabs aren't human enough not to be selfish and care more for their air conditioning, electricity and comfort than for what some whack-job is promising them will be Paradise and eternity. Maybe. At some point in the future. If Allah agrees, and the rain doesn't fall, and the creek doesn't rise.
Or at least 95% of them will plunk for comfort and that most certainly is NOT going to be obtained by voting in a bunch of uneducated gun-waving fanatics whose theme-song is "ULULULULU"!
Seems like they might be watching their neighbor to the East, getting more and more tired of the Mullahs.
Then all you have to posit is they have the brains to add 2 plus 2.
Sure beats "ULULULULU"!
...and they did sorta master arithmetic way back when.
Two wars, two Kerrys .
At the time the first George Bush was still flush with victory in the Persian Gulf, and dinnergoers chortled over a videotaped presentation of assorted senate Democrats backpedaling in the wake of a war they'd opposed.
Ted Kennedy was shown.
News clips were shown.
But for Kerry, the speaker simply read the two letters, to everyone's amazement.
"It's like those before-and-after pictures they print in the papers,"
the speaker said.
"If they didn't tell you so themselves, you'd think they were different people."
Kerry has to remember that one.
The speaker was Sen. John Heinz.
Two weeks later, he would die in a plane crash.
Four years after that, Kerry would marry his widow --
a woman who speaks directly and without equivocation and doesn't need two sets of letters to make her mind known.
He might want to ask her for a copy of the speech.
Ash, when you said " At one point the UN offered to take over, the US said no." What point in time were you referring to?
On June 1, 2005, Knight Ridder reported: "Jaafari said he would like the U.N. Security Council to extend Resolution 1546, which authorizes the U.S. presence until June 8. He made his comments while addressing the Iraqi National Assembly.
''It is true that [the multinational forces] are not Iraqi forces but their task is to secure the country under the Iraqi will and Iraqi timetable,'' Jaafari said after the assembly session. ``So if Iraqis choose, through their elected government, that they need extension [of Resolution 1546] in order to improve the security situation, the decision will be Iraqi.'' "
I imagine you'll respond that they're just a puppet government.
I agree with Rwe that discussing oil, as in, 'if there was no oil in the Mideast we wouldn't be there' is pointless. If we had gills and fins and lived in the ocean, we'd be fish. What's the point of arguments that posit an impossibility as the starting point? The global economy is dependent on oil, for the next several decades at least. GOI.
I believe the term "neo-conservative" is being used to loosely describe the spread of democracy as the ultimate motivation for policy. While democratization is a useful tactic in breaking up the ME form of tribal dictatorships, democratization is not the core focus. Protection of American interests, rejection of realpolitik, and slipping the counter-productive chains of "multi-lateralism" are all more important elements for neo-cons.
Nahncee's uplifting aggressive positions might be called neo-conservative.
Peter, one thing that unites the otherwise diverse pro-pullout caucus is that both the pullout-to-win-elections folks as well as the pullout-to-defeat-the-West folks think they have magic wands that will guarantee the consequences of their dreams. Realism is being practiced only by the two organizations doing the actual killing, the troops and the terrorists. Or, if you prefer, GWB and the jihadis.
The Kennedy wing cannot afford to merely shut-up, for cryin' out loud, Bush might win (fill in either/both, (1)the war, (2) the next election)!
Channeling the DC Democrats: "Future, schmuture. Western culture, screw that, what about my career, my DEALS?"
If you buy the idea that the 9/11/01 attacks were the result of the stationing of U.S. troops on sacred Arab lands, then I suppose you also have to accept that WWII was all about the German need for Leibenstram and the mistreatement of German people in Poland. And then there is the worldwide Jewish Conspiracy - again. Funny how that keeps coming up. You would almost think that the Facsists all read the same books.
When you accept their consistently absurd propaganda, you give them an enomous advantage. And it really makes you look stupid, too.
Blackford Oakes,
The Subic Bay lease was not renewed due to extortionate demands by the Phillipines. It was not abrogated. If we get a nice ironclad lease with the Iraqi government which is formed after the new constitution is approved and it is for fifty years, it will be sufficient.
I believe that the Kurds will enter into discussions with Turkey at a minimum. The deal has potential because of the antipathy not in spite of it. Who is most advantaged by such a deal? The Kurds would have to trust the Turks to provide security and the Turks would have their hands around the Kurds economic lifeline. It would also keep Baghdad on its toes regarding fair treatment of the Kurds.
Actually, that's another reason for a strong mutual defense pact between Iraq and the US. Neither the Sunnis nor the Kurds should have any desire for a fully integrated Iraqi military structure for twenty years. If they can farm out defense needs to the US, why shouldn't they do so? An Iraqi Air Force cannot be used to bomb Kurdish villages if it doesn't exist.
Peter,
Easy:
Buddy Larsen,
Care/Of: Doug
rwe, amen. Peter, I stole it from the American 16th century playwright William Shakespeare ("Bard of the Mississippi"). But, thanks, anyway! ;-)
World Apart
"Bush Takes On Senate Democrats!"
To the pile of easily disproven memes of the left, can we now throw "no Al Qaeda in Iraq" on top of "no WMD's" and "war for oil"?
Pay No Attention to the Terrorists Behind the Curtain
"This story is old news to Power Line readers; we covered it here, here, here and here. This is from one of the early news reports:
A televised confession by the terrorist allegedly responsible for carrying out the operation included information that closely tracks the testimony about Zarqawi and his operations in Iraq that Secretary of State Colin Powell presented to the United Nations Security Council on Feb. 5, 2003.
In Herat, [Afghanistan]," Jayousi told Jordanian TV, "I began training under Abu Musab [al Zarqawi] which involved high-level instruction in explosives and poisons. Then I promised my loyalty to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. I agreed to work for him -- no questions asked. When Afghanistan fell, I again met up with al-Zarqawi in Iraq."
"There in Iraq," said Jayousi, "I was told by Abu Musab to travel to Jordan with Muwaffaq Udwan. We were to get ready for a military action in Jordan."
"When I arrived in Jordan, I met with another person with ties to Abu Musab by the name of Haytham Omar Ibrahim -- a Syrian -- who secured our safe houses," said Jayousi.
"Next Muwaffiq and I began reconnaissance on the targets," said Jayousi. "Then we began to gather chemicals needed to make explosives. . . . amassing almost 20 tons, which was sufficient for all our plans in Jordan. Then I began manufacturing."
So, after the fall of Afghanistan at the end of 2001, Zarqawi and other al Qaeda veterans made their way to Iraq, where, secure under the wing of Saddam Hussein, they plotted chemical weapons attacks on countries friendly to the U.S., as well as the murder (successfully carried out) of an American diplomat. And yet, to this day it remains an article of faith on the left that Saddam's Iraq was a kite-flyer's paradise with no connection to international terrorism, no relations with al Qaeda, and, of course, no chemical weapons. Maybe the current trial will reveal where the chemicals assembled for the attack on Jordan came from; maybe it won't. But we don't need any new information to understand that Saddam's regime protected and supported the deadliest of al Qaeda's terrorists."
Actually, now that I'm starting to get the hang of thinking like a lib, I could see how we forced the poor terrorists to go to Iraq after we meanly bombed poor Afghanistan when we were in our 'lashing out' phase after 9/11.
Cedarford, who ya like for prez in '08?
I think if you were to go back and look at the news stories from then, what the UN offered to do in Iraq was to take over America's soldiers who were already there. In other words, Kofi, et al, wanted to command America's toys, a train set that would make even Orson Wells green with envy.
And further the proposal was *not* to pull the soldiers out of Iraq. I don't remember at this point -- and am not willing to take the time to go look it up -- whether the UN's generous offer included adding UN "peacekeepers" to the American mix of "those who are willing" who were already there. I rather think not, other than to tack a bunch of UN officers at the tops of all American squads, troops, battalions, etc., to make sure the proper orders were being issued.
But then the UNer's who *were* there got themselves blowed up by ignoring American security recommendations, and showed their moral fortitude and mental stamina by waving their white flag in the best Froggy fashion and retreating back to the steamy shores of New York City. Post haste. Or hastier, even.
Yes. By all means, let's do give ourselves to the UN to run our lives for us, like Ash is prescribing as an alternative to Dubya's agenda of world changes.
Shall we vote on it?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Cedarford: It presumes that the only resolution of the conflict is purely military in nature with an absence of strategic communications and outreach and other forms of "soft power".
I have read the fatwas and listened to our enemy Al Qaeda et. al. If you take them seriously at all, you come to believe the only resolution is purely military. Further, we are not at war with Iraq any longer, we are still at war with Islamofascists. I believe this is the enemy Rwe refers to.
And Nahncee, yes, let's vote on it.
LOL! GOod post, Nahncee, especially the Snagglepuss reference!
No, declarations of war by fascists, communists, and the rest of the forces of tyranny do not provide any insight into their real reasons. They are always invariably utter fabrications. If they said their real reasons for war out loud and still possessed any shred of decency they would go home afterwards and put a bullet through their own heads. So they lie. Always. And I utterly reject the notion of any equivalence - moral, factual, or philosophical - between the Declaration of Independence and any speech or statement by Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mussolini, Saddam, and the like.
Cedarford said: the long-term presence of large "infidel" armies in Saudi Arabia made for huge global issues.
They might want to be careful here. Or before long the presence of Arabs on the Israeli peninsula will became a issue.
Ha! wouldn't that be da shitz--the year 2015, and Israel is holding the North African Management Contract signed by King George Bush--yeah, baby, bring it ON! Get this mess sorted OUT! ;-)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The Iran Bomb may be the green light. It will definitely be some kind of light, sooner or later.
Right, we have to remember, so much has already been done. It's almost hard to say it, but it's the truth, Iraq in now an ally.
"hard to say it" not because it isn't a magnificent turn of history--it IS that--but merely that the hour is early, and the words are still alien to the tongue.
Larsen, then you better be sure you want these guys to be your friends.
.
.
http://www.sciri.org
Cedarford, like all those who look for rational "root causes" to explain Islamofacism, is someone who doesn't, and intellectually can't, come to terms with the fact that our resentments - mine, yours, everyone's - are in good part irrational and delusional. I wouldn't bore everyone by repeating this for the umpteenth time if our lives didn't depend on coming to terms with it.
BTW, C4, have you noticed that in the entire history of Islamic civilization, one dynamic is constant: warrior bands made up of clansmen or tribesmen from the countryside regularly descend on the towns and cities to kick out of religious and secular power the corrupt cityfolk who they think are destroying the faith through various forms of decadence. IN most of this history, the enemy of the "Islamicists" are fellow Muslims. It is only in the globalized world that the enemy in the worldly world can become the US, ISrael, etc. In other words, the dynamics of resentment and Islamic war that we are talking about long predate the current disposition of secular powers, and ultimately need to be explained in terms of how Islam divides up worldly and religious authority, among the tribe, clan, umma, etc. But the divided loyalties of the Islamic world are something, it seems, you know nothing about. For you, it's just them against the Jews and the Jew lovers.
When these guys in Canada agree with Kennedy, something is WAY wrong in the Democratic party.
Consider this a highlighting of Truepeers' concluding paragraph.
Thank you for providing me with such interesting information. I had no idea that Simon Bolivar, Martin Luther, Vasclav Havel and Ghandi were definable as fitting within the definition of the "forces of tyranny" as I specified.
I assume that you are were fierce agreement with Baghdad Bonjur and Jihad Jim McDermont when they stated that the democratically elected leader of a truly free republic was lying but that you have to take the statements of the government of Saddam Hussein at "face value."
Cedarford said: Of course the Muslims are tribal and backward and a menace..but they are a trivial menace compared level of menace China poses to our future.
We are dealing with the here and now. And in the here and now, this "trivial menace" is costing the US an arm and a leg to bring under control, literally. In the mean time, that evil Chinese menace is helping the US in footing the bill.
So Cedarford, do you think the US and other countries should be more scared of a strong China, or a China losing face and breaking up internally into warring states, maybe lobbying nukes around, and maybe abroad, just so the warring parties can prove to the masses who's the toughest and number 1 Chinese leader around?
Mika, Truepeers, just put Israel where Taiwan is (and vice-versa); that'll make the jihad deadly and the Chinese harmless tribesmen.
LOL. So true.
Cedarford, I can't tell if you're being serious or snarky when you say: "Of course the Muslims are tribal and backward and a menace..but they are a trivial menace compared level of menace China poses to our future."
The difference is, China feels like they have a real, breathing civilization that's worth protecting. Therefore, good old dependable triad works like a charm to keep the mutual violence down, at least for now. The same can't be said for the suicidal dead enders.
"Iraq in now an ally."
Every Wahabi to get from Street!
All you base is ours!
Jeez, we're all licking things. If ya can't join 'em, lick 'em!
It's a world of bent-over people licking things! Now I get it! ;-)
Chip, you're right, if it all turns out to've been a waste, it will be bitter indeed.
Buddy Larsen said...
"It's a world of bent-over people licking things! Now I get it! ;-)"
Chip Nelson said...
"It's eat your cake and have it too."
...then he said something about a "boorish ass," but I didn't get that part.
It's probably what made Marx Grouchy, I guess.
Religion Journal:
. Worship, Dark and Steamy, for Murderers and Rapists .
---
. Whether the inmates truly have Indian blood or not is of no concern to prison officials .
---
Sounds like the Churchill Ward.
(I wonder if that fat guy right behind the blue shirt is a murderer or rapist?)
---
What you learn in the MSM these days!
...wonder when they'll
Declare the Domestic Scene a
QUAGMIRE? .
Now I'm 'sposed to say
"Read the whole thing,"
but since I haven't started and probably won't, I guess that would be hypocritical.
Not that I pass judgement on hypocrits, of course.
Whatever.
I left out the credits, it was by
MAREK FUCHS
The american democratic senators appear to imply that it was the US government that initiated hostilities against the islamic terror networks. The terrorists are the victims here, senators? Is this what you are saying?
By taking the side of the terrorists they place themselves within the European intellectual mainstream. Perhaps that is the approach which appeals to their constituents. Leftists actually thrive on that type of thing.
Cedarford, you were away so long... It may be unbelievable to you that there are people in this world who listen to all the bluster and threats of cowards, demagogues, and false patriots (take your pick) and feel only cool indifference, that they may follow all the more wisely... I'm not a Daoist, yet, but, believe it or not, some of us grow up in families where many of the highlighted stories are about walking away from worldly fortunes and opportunities - which is why we're always working and serving hard to make a world again. Idolatry and antidolatry are the last things on which you should lecture. For that you must be incredibly patient... You think the Chinese are patiently biding their time, just waiting for the moment to bury you? Fey, you know little about the patience with which we may yet help you survive in this world...
You deserve no response, but lest some youths get confused, cause the truth, as usual, is just there in front of them, but nowadays the last thing anyone is ever taught is just see it... Nope, it's not a victim kids, it's not a demon, it's not anything unusual or special... it's just what happens when you can't wait any longer...
If President Bush were a liberal Democrat; if he were bombing a white Christian, politically clumsy fascist in the heart of Europe; if al Qaeda and its Islamist adherents were properly seen as eighth-century tormenters of humanists, women, homosexuals, non-Arabs, and non-Wahhabi believers; and if Iraq had become completely somnolent with the toppling of Saddam's statue, then the American people would have remained behind the effort to dismantle Islamic fundamentalism and create the foundations to ensure its permanent demise.
But once the suicide murdering and bombing from Iraq began to dominate the news, then this administration, for historical reasons largely beyond its own control, had a very small reservoir of good will.
The Islamists proved to be more adept in the public relations of winning liberal exemption from criticism than did the administration itself, as one nude Iraqi on film or a crumpled Koran was always deemed far worse than daily beheadings and executions. Indeed, the terrorists were able to morph into downtrodden victims of a bullying, imperialistic America faster than George W. Bush was able to appear a reluctant progressive at war with the Dark Age values of our enemies.
And once that transformation was established, we were into a dangerous cycle of a conservative, tough-talking president intervening abroad to thwart the poorer of the third world — something that has never been an easy thing in recent American history, but now in our own age has become a propagandist's dream come true.
— Victor Davis Hanson is a military historian and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. His website is victorhanson.com.
You got in the way, truepeers.
That was sposed to follow al fin.
Oh well.
Lost by a minute, lost by mile.
(but it wasn't even a minute!)
June 23, 2005
The Liberating Power of Truth
A review of Brian C. Anderson’s
South Park Conservatives. The Revolt against Liberal Media Bias .
---
. The Liberating Power of Truth
"As firebombs and A-Bombs fell on Dresden, Hiroshima, Atlanta, Yokohama, Nagasaki, Hamburg....."
---
C.,
?
Losing to fascists would make things right?
Wretchard,
Take a good look at C4 at 4:02. This antiSemitic piece of shit is stinking the place up to the point where I don't quite understand why people continue to post comments.
Bat One,
I am not certain we should "bear any burden" right now the burden needs to be shouldered by us but eventually we need Iraq to stand on its own. The last thing we want is another Europe that can disarm and leaves its defense to us.
Cedarford,
Nobody can steal "your" job. You don't own "your" job. And if you think you owed a job, I really don't see what's your beef with the Chinese commies.
Btw, I've always thought it best to relocate the Arabs to the Chinese desert. But now Cedarford has me all terrified of the Chinese. Maybe it would be better to let the Chinese have the "Arabian" desert?
Rick, it may be a good thing to have a demo of how it twists around bits and pieces of the historical narrative.
For example, had he not pulled up the "Jewish Moneychangers", Truepeers wouldn't have been stirred to remind us that the very origin of the western ideal of sacrificial conscience originated with the ancient tribe, and even more importantly that the ancient tribe deliberately continues to honor the same idea that brought it together 5,000 years ago.
That ancient cohesiveness is, of course, why the demons are always attacking it. The C4s always have a shred of truth, and he's right in that the Judeao-Christianity does have to be defended, and that if it did not exist, then it wouldn't have to be defended.
As to where this notion goes wrt secularism and its attendant despair, let your imagination go where it will.
I think Cedarford should be allowed to post as he wills. He's creative with his writing/arguments and the rebuttals are stimulating as well. It's too bad his emotions have been poisoned so, but I think he's intelligent enough to understand this, eventually.
Buddy,
He can peddle his sorry assed taqiya/Yellow Peril bullshit til he turns blue and if Wretchard thinks it's OK, fine. But he doesn't get to make his scummy little remarks personal without hearing about it.
He's a second rater from a second rate Saudi funded ME program who's learned to regurgitate on cue and isn't worth the time taken to rebutt his nonsense.
As I said, Wretchard's call, but allowing direct attempts to slur on a racist basis is dangerous business.
Rick, gotcha, but it's good to know the enemy, too. The "America First" meme is especially instructive, as it's one of the more dangerous attack lines on America.
..as C4 contexted here, it becomes "America Only" and thus the one-sided ledger notions, claiming patriotism, steadily leave the field to the real enemy, while trying to stimulate the creation of a second real enemy, and the linking of the two against us. China of course has a militant ChiCom faction, but the US/China trade is raising the whole globe, and the commercial private links are the good chance we have of finessing the military death duel that granted is within the realm of possibility.
Peter, 8:57, crack-up LOL!
And now for some comic relief:
This man murdered three St Petersburg men.
Then he marinated and ate them. Yet, says the police psychiatrist, he is not like other serial killers:
they are crazed loners, but the cannibal is an affable sort.
And only too pleased to exchange recipes
The cannibals who have been captured have proved to be surprisingly matter-of-fact. Sergei Dzhumagalayev, once a paratrooper, now better known as the Kazakh Cannibal, was arrested after proudly revealing to his dinner guests the secret ingredient of his meat dumplings: a blue-eyed blonde.
On Kusikov's capture, he beseeched the arresting officers to take his jars of dried ears and buckets of human bones for stock - so they wouldn't go to waste.
They are different from the run-of-the-mill serial killers in that they tend to be popular people - at least until their crimes are revealed. They are the sort of people you would go to the pub with.
Dzhumagalayev was a renowned ladies' man.
Kusikov was never short of a drinking partner.
And even the Rostov Ripper, the schoolteacher Andrei Chikatilo, had no difficulty persuading children to come looking for mushrooms.
They are mid-mannered professionals and kind-hearted grandfathers with dark secret lives.
(Cannibals have something else in common: they smell. Doctors interrogating Chikatilo - who butchered and ate parts of 52 young women, boys and girls after they agreed to go into the woods with him - spoke of the killer's pungent odour. Kusikov has the same animal smell - peculiar, say police, to psychopaths, a goaty smell that comes from an acrid sweat made by a body full of the wrong chemicals.)
. Hannibal the Cannibal .
In the last decade, there has been an unprecedented rise in the number of serial killers in the former Soviet Union. Between 70 and 100 are currently estimated to be on the loose - and more than a dozen of these are cannibals, a group that is more prevalent in the former Soviet Union today than in any other part of the world.
Which is worse?
Joos, or Joo lovers?
China has no Central Bank--the "peg" is their make-do. granted it may have to climb if PRC isn't going to be WTO-levered into floating the Yuan. Which if they do will cause a dislocatingly fast slowdown in world economic growth. Fear of this is already acting on the flattening US Treasury yield curve. China has half the US GDP, and is growing twice as fast. They've been buying our debt and keeping inflation low, and raising our statndard of living. Yes, we are having to walk the walk of globalization. The world--led by PRC is closing the economic gap. So, don't like it if you don't want to. Go tell the Chinese to stay poor and hungry, that it makes us feel better that way.
What you don't understand, C4 (or maybe you do), is that you are the great ally of the very faction in PRC that is most dangerous to us.
China's Response to the Downfall of Communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union
. Authors: Jialin Zhang and Buddy Larsen
Buddy,
Couldn't Oil Price be part of the flattening?
I agree with RWE's statement:
"I find the focus on oil by some people to be curious, at best and rather disingenuous at least... Would 9/11/01 have happened if we had no need of the oil in the Middle East? I think the answer certainly is "yes." While the terrorists might - and only might - have had access to less monetary resources, the hatred and cultural conflict that drove the terrorist attacks still would have been there. Indeed, if the people there were worse off, the hatred might have well been even more intense."
[The other posts by RWE are just as logical. Cederford is off base]
NahnCee's posts were great.
Dan's comments on labeling the terrorists "pirates" is interesting. I have always thought they were unemployable men whose only skill was killing. And, add superstition and a religion that pits "us against the infidels" and you have a deadly cancerous group of people. Once, some "Cleric" forms a grudge against somebody or group he merely declares them "unbelievers" who are to deceived, raped, pillaged and killed (no holds barred). Thus, Dan's point that as pirates they should be treated as such (exterminated).
Rick ballard makes a good point about the value of having a military base close to our enemies. I would certainly think that a base there would be a big asset. The projetion of power could be huge - and it could come in very handy. My understand from reading Rumsfeld's remarks it will not be called a "military base" but more of a "Embassy" with the necessary military assets to meet our needs. And, I have this feeling we will be their for a while.
Let me key off of what Tony said because it leads to Wretchards theme. I believe that all the hue and cry from various unfriendly quarters is a simple propaganda campaign which is designed to draw suspicion away from two major trials (It's a old tactic - spin the major cases in the court of public opinion).
The two cases are: 1) Saddam's war crimes. 2) the huge WMD case in Jordan involving 13 terrorists who attempt to kill up to 80,000 people with VX nerve gas.
At first glance, the two case seem somewhat unrelated. But upon closer inspection they are linked. The basic link is VX nerve gas - Saddam had it. Just as the invasion of Iraq uncovered the infamous OFF scandal, this case may reveal that Saddam did indeed have WMD and circulated them to different counties (such as Syria). This information could prove very discomforting to foes of Bush - just as the OFF scandal. Gateway Pundit has a nice roundup on the story (but, Power line pushed the story initially).
[Terrorists to judge]:
The defendants roared "Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi will chop off your heads and stuff it up your mouths, you God's enemies,"
See: History's Largest WMD Trial
The explosives and chemicals were to be carried in three trucks with reinforced bumpers for crashing through gates. The explosives were to be just enough to create a poisonous cloud of blister, choking and nerve agents. (In the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the terrorists used too much explosive, and the chemicals in the van were consumed in the blast.) The conspirators said they hoped to kill as many as 80,000 people... Intelligence expert John Loftus said the nerve agent in the chemical cocktail was VX. Syria doesn't make VX. Saddam Hussein's Iraq did.
See: The case of Iraq's weapons is not closed
...a chemical expert at Jordan's General Intelligence Department, testified that a large quantity of plastic containers seized from the defendants contained hydrogen peroxide. He said the accused planned to add 'ground black cumin' to the concentrated solution, which would have made "an explosive substance stronger than TNT." ...the defendants also had oxygen, sulfuric acid and nitroglycerin. "These are highly combustible substances which the defendants had planned to use to cause explosions that would have dispersed the toxic chemicals," he said.
See: Al Qaeda plotted chemical attack
And see: Powerline
Peter,
I wonder if the riding crop getting hooked in the turban when he gets a bit frenetic.
Or tell people in this country that they don't like low unemployment, low mortgage rates, burgeoning home ownershiop, cheap high-quality goods, available credit, personal income growth twice the inflation rate, a bond yield of 5% against an SP500 yield of 6% where any ordinary joe can buy share in an index fund and own a piece of China as well as the USA--or any other part of the earth. The latin mkts are up 40% since 2000, and even the economic museum of europe is protecting value. The flat-tax tigers of e. Europe are growing tremendously. The world has two big problems, scarce energy and terrorism--those are the areas to worry on--not the trade deficit--that's only the one side of the ledger--we also own the shit we bought with that deficit--and the yuan is pegged TO THE DOLLAR. All your selective scare numbers are half-stories even when the numbers are right. The US long bond is @ 4%. FOUR PERCENT. Global demand for our debt shows ZERO sign of abating. Start screwing around with trad tariffs--like the Schumer bill and it's unbelievably stupid 27% tariff on PRC, and that demand for our deby WILL dry up, and we'll be on our way to the 30s again. You half-economists are a bigger threat than Osama.
"like the Schumer bill and it's unbelievably stupid 27% tariff on PRC, and that demand for our deby WILL dry up, and we'll be on our way to the 30s again."
---
Isn't that what Chuckie wants?
...would match his perspective on the USA.
"scarce energy "
Yeah, please answer my yield question above.
9:23
yeh--sorry for the typos--trying to watch some crazy comet shit on the History Channel. had a 5% bond up there that is 4%, too. damn one-finger typing takes both eyes.
"See: History's Largest WMD Trial"
---
Seems like we're living it every day just by being exposed to the MSM.
The trial of GWB/WMD
Larry Kudlow is an Artur Laffer, Jeremy Siegal, Milton Friedmanish sort of economist who is turning purple over Schumer. Kudlow has a CNBC daily after-market show, 4:00 PM CST, that will straighten out a lotta foggy half-stories spun by people who have a few cherry-picked stats with which to stun the polity.
Hope RWE (or someone) can comment on C4's description of their missile capability and etc.
Those are the highest numbers I've seen.
Here, don't let yourself go wobbly on the economy.
One last time:
Isn't oil price part of the reason for the yield curve as well as China worries?
Kudlow on Chuckie:
"xenophobic, nationalistic, and economically illiterate statements.
"
You have to be to have Chuck's political outlook.
Who will save our economy if not the experts hired by the next administration?
...liberal administration, of course, saving us from the worst economy in the last 400 years or so.
Doug, Condi signaled sometime back--a couple weeks--that PRC is bothering us with the buildup. Us is Japan, Australia, USA in the western Pacific. This build-up has been in high-gear ever since PRC saw what we could do in Desert Storm. It has momentum from then. But Bank of America among many others has been buying some large positions in PRC banking--our banks have powerful contacts in their banks--this is big world-historical movement, the last four-five years of resounding growth and integration between the two countries. there are two waves, on military and the other commercial. The military one may have peaked, the commercial one is only beginning. No pollyanna here, just an admonition to watch the velocity and direction of countervailing trends.
"damn one-finger typing takes both eyes"
---
Are one-eyed people better touch typists?
I lied, giving it another try:
Oil prices and interest rates?
Wikipedia defines "displacement" as "an unconscious defence mechanism, whereby the mind redirects emotion from a 'dangerous' object to a 'safe' object. For instance, some people punch cushions when angry at friends."
It's obvious who/what the "safe object" is. Cedarford, any guesses as to who/what the "dangerous object" is?
We'll know all is well when they tell the little guy in N Korea to go to hell.
(frozen over, of course.)
That cat looks suspicious.
Who? Wretchard?
Doug, the oil price question works into currency exchange rates as well as bond yields and is really difficult to make a decent post on. Even if i knew how to answer you, it would take a thousand words. let me find you a site later. Basically, you're getting at the relationship between economic growth and long yields--oil prices at a certain point will choke growth and thereby lower long yields--the problem there is the Fed uses Fed fund rates to both fight and signal inflation (or lack) and if the long bond goes below the FF rate--an inverted yield curve--business confidence will really sag, as every inverted yield curve we've ever sustained for some period (6 mo?) has presaged a recession. Basically, the latest thinking is the spot crude price that sustained can--might could--cause this is 75-80/bbl. But--when we were at 40, the tip price was pegged at 60 (that's why we had the thurs/Fri selloff). And, the "lag" of oil price on industrial output is rule-of-thumb a year. Meanwhile, the low long money is chasing capital into housing--protecting it, hopefully. Business confidence is everything--uncertainty is a powerful drag. that's another reason this effort to make Vietnam again is so horrible--confidence is a real-market factor--a primary factor, not a secondary.
Maybe bring in Jimmy Carter as an economic advisor to avoid the inverted yield curve?
Carter's your man for every imaginable sort of inverted curve.
C4 said,
"This didn't play out well with most Saudis, and interviews with Saudi families whose sons had involvement with the 9/11 attack said that a major factor of why their sons became radicalized was their humiliation over infidels with weapons remaining in the center of Islam and propping up corrupt Princes.
No equivocation. Cause and effect, Dan!"
---
Ok, Nahncee,
Time to rethink your *Theory* that they have a "humiliation problem."
I was devastated to learn that those poor all caring, all loving, all feeling, (I feel their grief.) *parents* had to watch as their sweet innocent young boys became radicalized and
*humiliated* at the hands of the Evil US Military.
With all the effort those poor parents put into raising them kids right, they probably would have turned out to be Choir Boys, if not for the Damned US Military.
We should interview the parents of those cannibals to find out what we (GWB/US Military) did wrong to cause them to change their diet so radically.
...and did that radical smell come before or after the radical diet?
I know:
It was Ronald Reagan!
That guy radicalized more damned communists.
Buddy,
I was looking at an article (can't find it now) that indicated that increased tax receipts at both Fed and state levels were taking pressure off the debt market. Apparently even some of the sicker states are swinging back into the black and the Feds are about $61 bil up YTD in tax revenue.
Heard anything on that angle?
Mika, the dangerous object would be the uncontrollable, the unrationalizable--Death, God, Conscience--perhaps?
"Infidels with Weapons "
would have been a good Military Motto in the days before PC.
Jeez, Bud!
That's
The Other Guy!
And it could also explain Cedarford rather nihilist end positions.
Who's the other guy? Satan?
That damned Cat!
You know they can see into the other world.
Rick, yes, the lowered rates are following the Laffer curve--but the AMT is also partly responsiblle and is pissing off a lot of people who rose lately into the category. But to tag the lowered deficit to lowered debt demand is to stretch out into the "crowding out" theory that has been moot ever since capital became plentiful under the Fed "accomodation" policy. if there was more debt supply (as there would be @ lower tax recpts) demand would fall relative to it--thus lowering price and raising yields--as you suggest--but the wild card is the elastic demand. As treasury auctions highlight, it has so far in the current cycle been inexhaustible. When PRC and ROK tried a few months ago to signal us to tighten and stop the USD slide, yields went up a few basis points and the Russians, Venezuelans and ERuropeans immediately took the slack and we never had more than just a few clunky auctions. and now USD is strengthening adding even more depth to the demand. The US military and the consrvative movement (Bush spends too much but that is seen as waning liberal political power with SocSec, Medicare, and IRS reform all in the wings helping us be a respectable banker) is in some ways I think responsible for this growing confidence in the US as the bank. But the Dems are trying to break it all down, and the issue is whether they'll be successful or not.
Bud sees into the other world of Global Finance.
Maybe its HIM!
Socialism depends on deprivation, as no one understands better than you.
The other world that THAT sees into is the world of groceries.
He'd get Grouchy Marx's vote for sure.
I meant THAT cat...skipped a word, didn't mean to dehumanize the damn kitty.
You could always go back to where you once belonged:
We could show the young uns how to grow Victory Gardens!
LOL.
Not to worry Buddy. He's been declawed.
Buddy,
Have you seen anything that addresses the 401K spike that will occur when the first boomers cross the 59 year barrier next year? Even without retiring some boomers are going to begin to move money across into the spending column when they're not facing early withdrawal penalties. How many trillion are tied up in 401K's?
Two schools, big market boom as retirees start playing more actively, big market slide as money leaves equities & gets converted to consumption. Diametrically opposite forecasts--IOW, what makes markets! But 70% of that bloc is in the 1955-1964 cohort--so nothing will happen anywhere near as dramatic as any preceding SocSec, Medicare, IRS reform will be.
Ha, thanks for the global finance compliment, Doug--but I really don't know much at all--just barely enough to know that C4 doesn't know anything either.
"But the Dems are trying to break it all down"
25 years and counting.
Did you read Hewitt today?
"Intention, Causation, Responsibility and Culpability"
How fast can Hewitt read???
The amount of stuff he devours and links too!
He and Rush, in mostly different ways, are great examples of Larry Summer's point about men that put their time into their work, their passion, not kids.
Rush is getting a little more into decadence these days, however:
Like that damned cat.
Damn!
Now we're going to get humiliated deep inside our shell.
...and there'll be no way out.
Whatever,
So it's a bad thing to learn more about your enemies?
General Petraeus was doing that long ago in Mosul.
Buddy, et al:
Aren't there any kind of anti-monopoly controls for something like the Unocal Auction?
---
The Chicom company in reality is state owned, and Chevron, w/it's lesser 17 billion dollar or so bid is also already quite a large concern...
What's up with that?
Doug: The missile numbers look to me to be off by a factor of about 10 - for now.
In the early 90's I conducted my own analysis of what the PRC was gaining from launching U.S. made commercial communication satellites. I had trained the USAF officers who were sent to observe the flights and ensure that valuable technologies were not transferred. I did my own debriefings, drew conclusions, put it all in a package, ran it by the "real" intselligence people, and sent it to be staffed up to the approprite offices in OSD (who had dropped the ball - or perhaps I should say stuffed it into a trash can instead of the hoop and then run off with their fingers in their ears). Basically, I said that we had a big problem and it was unfixable as long as the PRC was launching our satellites. Never heard any more about it.
Until1 1998, when I was called to testify before a Congressional Committee on the subject.
At that time I found where my package had ended up. My boss's immediate superior had thrown it in the trash. Said it did not look important to him.
Is the PRC a threat? You bet. Is it in the same category as the USSR? No. But ignoring it won't make it better.
"My boss's immediate superior had thrown it in the trash.."
Sounds like a Clinton appointee.
How do those people get in the system?
I guess the joint naval training exercises are a thing of the past?
(I mean, I HOPE.)
I guess that Solar Sat using a Soviet Sub launched ICBM is not a problem, right?
DC Bloat, perhaps?
Major elements of OSD:
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Management Policy (FMP)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs (HA)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense (HD)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs (ISA)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs (LA)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration/Chief Information Officer (NII/DoD CIO)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs (PA)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs (RA)
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (SO/LIC)
Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Oversight (IO)
Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear & Chemical & Biological Defense Programs
Deputy Secretary of Defense
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Advanced Systems and Concepts
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Equal Opportunity
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Industrial Policy
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Material Readiness
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Military Community and Family Policy
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Program Integration
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Readiness
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology
Director of Administration and Management (DA&M)
Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDRE)
Director of Force Transformation
Director of Net Assessment
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E)
Director of Program Analysis and Evaluation (PA&E)
Executive Secretary of the Department of Defense
General Counsel of the Department of Defense
Inspector General of the Department of Defense
Secretary of Defense
Under Secretary of Defense Comptroller/Chief Financial Officer (USD(C)/CFO)
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (AT&L)
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (P&R)
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
What's the current status of who's launching what?
...think of the efficiency and innovation if all the money flushed down the shuttle/space station toy complex was given out in contracts to private AMERICAN launch companies.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rwe,
Thanks for your very interesting post on Chinese strategic capability. Even a civilian reading AW&ST for the past couple of decades, it's obvious C4's numbers are way off, either off right now or way off in the future.
His comment about MIRV's did remind me of the former Administration's perfidy in this regard, as evidenced by Loral and Hughes/Boeing paying those huge fines for sharing controlled technology. It was my understanding they gave away secrets for launching multiple payloads from a single booster, which China was having trouble with. Of course they did it to help commercial launches, but surely everyone in that business knows the technologies for satellites and warheads are virtually identical.
Any info on what was actually lost?
I'm in agreeance (as our fearless leader says) that C4 has rendered himself useless for civil dialogue. However, that crack about "America in decline" must be queried. What field would we be declining in? MTV? Steroids in baseball? Intellectual integrity among Democratic pols? I tell you one field we certainly are NOT declining in: military capability.
And Cedarford, one final suggestion: if you like engaging in battle by keyboard, I suggest you get yourself over to LGF. There are a lot of smart people over there, and they're not as, shall we say, delicate as Belmonters. They'll chew you a new one, bro. You'll enjoy it.
Peter 6:33, LOL--gagged on my coffee--the look on the guy's face is a scream--yes, the entity sure has the haughty sneer and the high-register prolixity down pat. Your 6:38--tho people will argue that financial integration didn't prevent Europe's WWs, it's still a strategic force for peace, having such a huge trading biz ongoing PRC/USA. Hitler could visualize slave labor, free mtrls, and treasure-robbing from his new empire--once the moral hurdle was behind him, a lotta profit from winning quick wars. Even if PRC had the same instincts as the Nazis, it sure does face a different world on that P & L score. Dontcha think?
Hmm, as chance would have it, Bill Gertz of the Washington Times has an article today: Chinese dragon awakens
Tony, that's another item that conforms to Peter's ID thesis. Sure, as the rest of the world gains wealth and defeats poverty, the USA "suffers" relative declines in economic stats. This has been ongoing as you know since 1945, when USA had two-thirds of world output because so much of the globe had zip. I guess we could've prevented it--still could, actually--just bomb the f**k out of everybody who tries to build anything. The National Socialist Left's favorite lie (we're already doing it), and the National Socialist Right's favorite fantasy (kill all competition now).
Tha's no sh*t. The only thing that died in 1945 was that German dude.
Non-sequiters r me--I meant the goose.
peter uk said: Secondly,even if China could make a first strike against the US,it could never invade,major troop movements are still by sea,how many transports would make it accross the pacific.
They wont need transports to make it accross the pacific. They'll just cross the border from Vancouver. :)
Anyway, Chinese girls are cute. They can take over me Village anytime they want.
The existential threat PRC presents the western democracies is--to me--that their mixed system can do things like give an order and build a dozen nuclear power plants and a dozen liquid propane port facilities all at once--which they're doing.
Our problem is that they see no reason to develop a "No!" opposition party, a green movement with a hard left political agenda, or an EPA that won't let any non-reds get anything done inside.
So, what we're mad about, in a way, is that they won't copy us and allow their stupid faction to veto needful government remedies. Our great strength--freedom--is being turned against us--insofar as praxis--just as the 20th century totalitarians tried to do, and only failed at great cost.
Tony, didn't Charles close off registration for new membership over at LGF?
Buddy, why than so much US capital investment in China? Why not India instead?
Seems like maybe the market knows something we don't.
Mika,
LGF was closed for awhile, distressing to those of us who like the laughs but forgot our password. But it seems to be open now. I see new people geting on. If you keep aknockin' you will get in.
Over there, they invite the silly posters to come meet them. HAH!
Imagine if we were all sitting around a bar, strangers, say the basement bar of the Star Hotel in Jo'burg in 1979, drinking beers to cool us off from the world's hottest chili, where they give you a raw radish on the side as a sweetner. Imagine one of these guys sauntering in and making all these obnoxious, foolish comments, not knowing who was sitting next to him. HAH.
Well, private money has simply been flowing to where the best returns are. The Chinese stock market has been in steep decline--like down 40% over the last year or two. A lot of the money has indeed been flowing to India, at an increasing rate.
The big USA-based multinationals have been primarily bricks-and-mortar investors rather than financials alone.
Buddy,
The thing about all this whining about China's growing military strength is positively silly compared to what we faced against the USSR. And we had to face that with 50's, 60's, 70's technologies of our own. Talk about parity, that was a nightmare.
If they choose to do so, China will be facing America's 21st century technology. Star Wars here we come!
As for the economy, (here I know even less than usual), where would they be without their huge trade imbalance with us?
If their system outcompetes our system, it'll be because our system gave the schools to the stupid party after WWII. I mean, no way around the advantage of being the low-cost producer, but it sure doesn't help to be sending our next generations to places that hire Ward Churchills, and before that having them taught K-12 by previous grads of samesuch.
Unocal--that'll have to sift thru DC--private shareholders have rights to see the books, and DC could stall it forever. I think there may end up being a quid-prquo--PRC can't but hope that we withdraw from the persian gulf, since no one can read the future and no one wants their rival to have boots atop the oil fields. Owning Unocal (our 8th largest oil co)might can parlay into bumping PRC off the fence and into activist alliance ag/ the jihad--on the strength that PRC will have lowered the future risk of a squeeze in the persian gulf. Just speculatin'.
Hah, Mika, you discovered the truth about Vancouver. In fact, 90% of the Chinese-Americans are connected to the Vancouver triads, and they all have instructions on how to melt down their woks into rifles in two days' time. So, when all your favorite restaurants have "closed for the holidays" signs on the door, that's the sign to open up the bomb shelter, my American friends....h/ Of course, if you like CHinese women, Vancouver's the place to be...
Peter, I've been looking for a suitable C4 photo. Can't help imagining...
Dom de Luise playing Himmler?
Well, you convinced me, David. Let's pull out--that'll put an end to the war.
Who else? "China is whipping our ass in just about every economic area, but our Reagan and Clinton era military is still better than China's."
Yeh. That's why me and the kids just went out for some McChina's and fries. That's why Mao's Greatest Hits are dominating MTV rotations. That's why people from all over the world are doing all they can to immigrate to China.
"America in decline" ... Yeh. Right.
(As for the military stuff, word to the wise bro, don't embarrass yourself, makes you look like a doof.)
Cedarford, you're a smart guy. China doesn't have a domestic market. It has no middle class. Its economy is dependent on exports. And its banking system is on the verge of collapse. Explain why China would risk damage to its biggest trading partner and the source of greatest material and intellectual investment in China, in favor of planting a flag on Taiwanese soil, or in favor of jihadi imperialist ambitions -- ambitions that the Chinese themselves are highly animus to and are struggling to repulse?
Post a Comment
<< Home