Friday, April 28, 2006

Madeleine Albright speaks at Princeton: Fourteen Points about democratization

[NOTE: This is a bit different than usual Belmont Club fare, but I nevertheless thought that at least some of Wretchard's readers would be interested in my coverage of Madeleine Albright's speech at Princeton this afternoon. As of a couple of hours ago, there was no press coverage of the event, so this report, tedious as it may be, is a Belmont Club/TigerHawk exclusive.]

This year, which is the 75th of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, four Secretaries of State have spoken at Princeton, and I have been fortunate to see them all. Condoleezza Rice spoke at the beginning of the academic year, George Shultz and James Baker this winter, and Madeleine Albright this afternoon. She gave the keynote address for the annual Princeton Colloquium on Public and International Affairs, this year devoted to "Woodrow Wilson In The Nation's Service." No transcript of the speech is yet available, and I haven't detected any press coverage. Until Princeton posts the video next week, this post seems to be the only coverage.

Secretary Albright was eloquent and charming, and cracked a few to the audience of Princeton faculty, students and alumni. Best non-partisan line: "South Korean intelligence said that Kim Jong-il is crazy and a pervert. He's not crazy." She should know, having been the highest ranking American to have met with Kim.

The topic of the Colloquium being Woodrow Wilson, Albright spoke about the Bush administration's democratization strategy. She referred to Secretary Rice's speech at Princeton last fall, which focused on the progress in that strategy. "At the time, her analysis was only somewhat rosier than reality." Since September, Albright said, the situation has deteriorated considerably, and not just in Iraq. The glimmers of liberalization that we thought we had seen from Egypt to Lebanon to Saudi Arabia have been stamped out, and Iraq is a model that not even the democrats in the region want to emulate.

Secretary Albright's core point was that the Bush administration has done a terrible job of implementing a fundamentally good idea, and that the strategy was failing. These perceived failures are, according to Albright, arming critics who variously argue that we should revert to emphasizing stability or, alternatively, simply decide that democracy in other countries is not a goal worth pursuing. She rejected both these approaches, and instead offered "fourteen points" that should sit at the center of the next administration's strategy for spreading democracy. Most of them are sound, even if platitudinous, and are reproduced below from my notes. My commentary, such as it is at this hour on a Friday night, is in italics.

One, "it is both right and smart to promote democracy around the world."

Two, "democracy must grow from within."

While this may be useful advice for people who live in mildly authoritarian countries because they can loosen their bonds incrementally, this does nothing for the millions who live under ruthless dictators.

Three, we need to "increase support for building democracy around the world, including in Iraq." Albright was sharply critical of the Bush administration's paltry funding for democracy-building efforts in Iraq, claiming that the total funds budgeted for that purpose are equivalent to six hours -- one quarter of one day -- worth of military operations in that country.

This criticism seems correct to me. The federal government seems to lack effective mechanisms for promoting democratic ideals. Even the most obvious ideas have not been implemented. It is astonishing and depressing that, *cough*, Juan Cole had to promote the idea of translating the great works of Enlightenment political philosophy into Arabic (not because I begrudge Juan Cole a good idea, but because the administration didn't have it three years ago).

Four, "democracy building is a team exercise." Secretary Albright called for the United States to work within international organizations, including but not limited to the various agencies of the United Nations.

Five, "democracy building is bottom up, not top down." In the partisan crack of the afternoon, Albright said that "according to President Bush, American has a calling from beyond the stars." [Knowing and scornful laughter all around.]

This is a platitude. Yes, institutions need to be built, and they are probably more durable if built from the bottom up. But there are plenty of examples of effective institutions that were imposed by outsiders, including Japan's constitution. How many of India's basic institutions of civil society were genuinely homegrown, rather than "imposed" by the British?

Six, "in assessing gains, free elections are essential but not sufficient." Long term, it is also necessary that there be equal treatment under law, "for without it democracy will curdle into fascism."

Agreed. Democracy need not be secular, but it must never be dangerous to lose an election.

Seven, "democracy must deliver." Where corrupted versions of capitalism have failed and where the people cannot own and trade their property in an honest system, authoritarians will rise again. The most obvious example of this is in the recent progress of the populist left in Latin America. "A strong economy is built from the ground up, and cannot be assembled from the crumbs of the rich's largesse."

Eight, "we must recognize what democracy can and cannot do. It cannot prevent terror [cites London and Madrid attacks, etc.].... it is a form of government, not a ticket to a fantasy land."

Shorthanded -- or hamhanded -- rhetoric aside, I don't think that even the administration believes that democracy prevents terror per se. The true purpose of the democratization strategy is to offer a coherent ideology that can compete with jihadi ideology, and thereby give ordinary Muslims a reason to fight the extremists. Nobody, even in the Bush administration, seriously believes that democracy is somehow a vaccine against terrorist attacks.

Nine, "democracy should be inclusive." Authoritarian Arab leaders argue that democracy won't work because the Islamists will come to power at the first election. The Arab response has been to ban these parties, when the right approach would be to compete with them. Albright reinforced this point with an argument about the election of Hamas, which "remains a terrorist organization." Hamas, she said, "will be tested as it never has been before. Democracy did not create Hamas, but as the result of democracy Hamas will either moderate in response to it or fail. Either result is an improvement."


Ten, "adopt a global approach." Don't just focus on the key battlegrounds, as the Bush administration seems to have done. We need to return to arguing that human rights are universal. "the Bush administration should push back" against dictators, Albright said, "but instead acts as though international law is a conspiracy to tie us down... If we don't recognize international standards, others will ignore them as well."

There is more to this argument than American hawks are willing to admit. That does not mean that Jacques Chirac gets to sign off on every decision that we make, but I agree with critics of the Bush administration that we send the wrong signal by refusing to engage with international organizations, however flawed.

Eleven, we need to work with non-governmental organizations, who share our interest in openness. Yes, some of them are illegitimate and many of them are very nettlesome, but they give fits to the bad guys and they need our protection. In protecting NGOs, democratic reformers inside authoritarian countries will get needed help from the outside.


Twelve, "we must be true to our own values." Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and warrantless surveillance have undermined our credibility in the Middle East, the "part of the world with the longest memory."

Albright is undoubtedly right, although she would not have been had these stories been reported differently. They are all actually examples of a democracy using its own institutions to redress, or at least examine and adjudicate, alleged crimes by the state. All three of these icons are trivial compared to their counterparts in the Middle East, and all have been exposed by Americans at no small political cost to the leadership. From the perspective of some beaten down guy in an authoritarian country, these "scandals" should be encouraging, rather than discouraging.

Thirteen, "we should support democracy with some degree of introspection." In this, she hinted at -- without acknowledging -- one argument of the Bush administration: that it took the United States an awfully long time to enfranchise its entire population and safeguard their rights in the political process.

Fourteen, "the most important point, that every individual counts."

Not being a liberal, I'm not sure what it means to "count."

The Secretary took three or four questions, including an "excellent question" -- her words, not mine -- from me regarding Iran policy during the Clinton era. I reminded her (politely) of her speech "apologizing" to Iran for past transgressions -- which was greeted with the diplomatic equivalent of a stiff arm -- and the decision not to retaliate for Khobar Towers in the wake of Mohamed Khatami's election in 1997. I observed that the Clinton era policy toward Iran was, in broad brush strokes, somewhat gentler than that of either the preceding or the succeeding administration. My question was, in light of what she knows today, if she had it to do all over again would she advocate a policy toward Iran that was gentler still, or one that was more confrontational? She dodged the question, although she did mount a nuanced defense of the Clinton era policy and further suggested that the Bush administration initiate direct talks with Tehran. Easier said than done, and certainly easier for her to say than do.

[Cross-posted at my home away from home, TigerHawk.]


Blogger Cedarford said...

Seven, "democracy must deliver." Where corrupted versions of capitalism have failed and where the people cannot own and trade their property in an honest system, authoritarians will rise again. The most obvious example of this is in the recent progress of the populist left in Latin America. "A strong economy is built from the ground up, and cannot be assembled from the crumbs of the rich's largesse."

Tigerhawk didn't comment but it is a key point if we poke our heads up from Iraq 365/24/7 tunnel vision and look how the "democratic reforms" we wish to emplace in Iraq have gone elsewhere and what the current situation is inside Iraq - if US money and oil wealth is being distributed widely or is in the hands of a small oligarchy of "connected Iraqis".

In Russia, they are moving back to authoritarianism because democracy didn't deliver. The people found their living standards plummeting while seeing corrupt fatcats taking the wealth...culminating in the rise of the 8 multibillionaire Oligarchs, who used their European and Israeli bank contacts to bribe the Yeltsin regime and end up with control of much of Russias wealth. In Ukraine, massive cirruption threatens to derail the Orange Revolution. Belarus, Poland, Uzbekistan, several recent "democracies" in Africa also suffer this corruption and oligarch problem on top of Latin America. Wretchard wrote of the Chinese middlemen who are in peril after attempting an oligarchy, and the Philippines have long had issues with their concentration of wealth at the top.

Latin America is not done with their hard Left turn. The failure of crony capitalism may take down Columbia, Panama, Ecuador, and possibly Mexico. Brazil, which was "saved" by Luna governing more moderately than he campaigned as - is now in growing disfavor and others wish to take the country more towards Chavez-style democracy.

Iraq? Apparantly billions in US rebuilding dollars has gone to a few hundred Iraqi exiles and "leaders" of the Kurd, Shia, and Sunni communities. There is no accounting for it...the Bushies say it was used, but don't know exactly on what...Same with the oil sales. It's not getting down to the people under the fantasized "crony capitalist trickledown" method - like it did under the Saddam patronage system, at least to the Ba'athist administrator levels all through Iraq..

Albright is right to point this out. If Democracy doesn't better the masses, it doesn't make it past a trial run. And no doubt she is digging the Bushie prediliction to reward the Rich here and abroad with most of the largess thinking "trickle-down" is a proven fact - when of course it is not...

4/28/2006 11:47:00 PM  
Blogger snowonpine said...

Come on!

This woman was a disaster at State and her trip to North Korea was an embarrasing debacle. Not exactly a deep thinker and her "discovery" that she had Jewish roots was a farce. I wouldn't take her advice on anything.

4/29/2006 01:20:00 AM  
Blogger buddy larsen said...

Of all the 90s do-overs on any half-sensible person's list, aiding and abetting the very dubious 1998 election of Hugo Chavez will be up near the top of the list. Ms. Albright sure talks a tough game nowadays, but her time in power was an apotheosis of fecklessness, dishonesty, policy-by-photo-op, and ludicrous stylized play-acted diplomacy. That she can critique anything--a mud fence or a box of rocks--with a straight face is an expression of pure contempt for the American people and their history.

4/29/2006 01:50:00 AM  
Blogger Deuce ☂ said...

I think this is a case where it is better to hate the messenger and listen to some of the message. All the comments preceding me are correct. When Albright was SoS, she did not get it. Neither did/does Bush. The US does not have a mission in the world as a birthright. Democracy has taken a bad first round in the world arena. It is a concept and idea of governance but hardly a panacea to cure the evils in the world. It does not do well when administered with heavy American hands or missionary zeal especially in places where the US is excruciatingly uninformed about local history and culture. There will be many opportunities for countries to try democracy. Many will fail the first time. That is partially happening now in Latin America and Russia. Islam is incompatible with democracy. There is a reason for that. Democracy has become the European and American state religion. It has mostly replaced Christianity because Christianity is seen as having failed society. This occurred during and after World War I and was completed by fascism and WWII. Nature abhors a vacuum and democracy filled the gap. The US was both the victor and the model after WWII and had a tremendous moral, military and political sway on the world. The crisis in Christianity spawned democracy.

Islam gives angst to the West. It is not a religion suffering from angst. It is truly a religion of true believers and will not suffer the opinions and demands of others. It is the natural enemy of democracy. You cannot mate a cat with a dog. You will never solve a problem or take advantage of an opportunity without ever having recognized either. Accept democracy for what it is and how it got here. Recognize Islam as it is and where it is not and at least you have a starting point for a strategy based on reality. Faith based foreign policy seems to be wanting.

4/29/2006 03:01:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

"...America has a calling from beyond the stars..." (knowing and scornful laughter all around...)

What Miss Albright and her arrogant friends and supporters are ignorant of is the 1920 trip to and across America by 'Abdu'l-Baha, all His public speeches documented in "Promulgation of Universal Peace".

Mr Bush doesn't talk about it, but America DOES have a mandate from the Manifestation of God for this Day.

America has some qualities and character singled out by the eldest son of The Glory of God, and is explicitly named in His writings as a source of strength and goodness in the world today!

Back to school, Miss Albright...

4/29/2006 03:16:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

2164th: With due respect, Sir, Baha'u'llah, the Glory of God, (and as far as I can see, the Righteousness That Is Christ come in the Glory of the Father) HAS explicitly democratized the Faith of God, and given religion and self-determination to ALL the people of humankind, NOT just Americans.

"From two ranks amongst mankind have I seized power... kings and ecclesiastics..." AND
"I have given power to the people."

I don't always like it, but America has a RIGHT to protect Americans, in part by instilling democratic ideals in other nations, and striving to give THEM a chance to realize the benefits of self-determination, a responsible life-style.

4/29/2006 03:22:00 AM  
Blogger Deuce ☂ said...

Karridine said...
"2164th: With due respect, Sir, Baha'u'llah, the Glory of God, (and as far as I can see, the Righteousness That Is Christ come in the Glory of the Father) HAS explicitly democratized the Faith of God, and given religion and self-determination to ALL the people of humankind, NOT just Americans."

I accept your dissent and offer mine. “Onward Christians soldiers” as a foreign policy may be scripturally correct, but somewhat lacking in promoting harmony and widely resisted and causing an unacceptably large pile of dead Christian soldiers. The Islamic piles of martyrs may be pleasing to Islamic sensibilities but neither pile gives me pleasure.

4/29/2006 03:38:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Couldn't she have picked just ten points. We've already done the fourteen point menu and it didn't impress to many.
All the post make god points but the BIG question about Ms Albright is she going to the NFL combine? I mean a 400 lb leg press is notable. I see here as a center although that means the QB ain't tak'in any direct snaps.
She was a lousy SOS a ruinous administration.

4/29/2006 03:59:00 AM  
Blogger orlandoslug said...

...easier for her to say than to do...

...academics is where she is at home...

...I'm afraid that academia resents truly novel ideas, teaches nibbling around the edges, and specializes in critiques...

...not a formula for leadership; but, perhaps important in creating malleable, risk averse employees...

...however, her articulate arguments should be taken into account; especially, regarding the importance of NGO's, world citizenship, and more elbow to elbow contact...

4/29/2006 04:14:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Too Bright by Half,
or as Bud would say:
Charmed, I'm sure!

4/29/2006 04:21:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Eleven...NGO's must work with blah blah..
I nominate J.Jackson and the Rainbow Coalition and LF's NOI.
Those are good NGO's, fit the Democrtic Party and can be coordinated from Slick Willie's Harlem HEADquarters. Of course Jimma Carter could have the peanut/newpaper stand, and be a courier.

4/29/2006 04:40:00 AM  
Blogger Meme chose said...

Thank you, this is great reporting.

I note that her whole position fell apart as soon as she encountered your question about Iran, i.e. an issue which is both practical and not cherry-picked to suit herself.

The fact that these problems confront us is the whole problem with her approach - the perennial Democratic impulse to just talk around threats and in the end agree to anything (including giving away the store) just to 'get an agreement' (as she did with North Korea) is just disastrous. Electing people like this to office in today's world is the equivalent of walking into a knife fight armed with a stapler.

Conveniently for people like Madeleine Albright, by the time the blood gets spilled she has already departed for her next conference, performing in front of an audience of foolishly admiring wonks in Aspen or Princeton.

4/29/2006 04:45:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

I must admonish Habu_1 for not understanding the importance of these fourteen points. They rank up the with Kellogg-Briand Treaty outlawing war.
He should treat these points with due repect, coming as they do from such an august person...

4/29/2006 04:47:00 AM  
Blogger Deuce ☂ said...

Al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, alleges insurgents have "broken the back of America in Iraq," in a new video that surfaced on Friday.

These guys are on the verge of an overposting rebuke from Wretchard

4/29/2006 04:49:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

A Hundred Dollar Rebate to Compensate for the Spiraling Cost of Democracy?
And a Coupon for a Free Lube Job.

4/29/2006 05:03:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

2164 4:49
Ayman al-Zawahiri is really Baghdad Bob and was referring to the recent movie "Brokeback Mountain"
He also said that no US troops were in Iraq and that the buried MIG's in the desert would work just fine after a trip to Jiffy -Lube

4/29/2006 05:03:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Anybody know the resolution of the old birds that returned ruskie pics in the form of re-entry cannisters of film?

4/29/2006 05:09:00 AM  
Blogger Deuce ☂ said...

Doug said...
"Anybody know the resolution of the old birds that returned ruskie pics in the form of re-entry cannisters of film?"

Interesting question. in the sixties and seventies the Soviets fired so many of those big babies hauling film back and forth, they helped the UK and US develop and fine tune the backscatter or Over-the-Horizon Radar System. It was a huge leap in early warning as the rockets left a radio signature when they reached sixty kilometers and the ionosphere, which as you know rises and lowers with solar radiation. as to the disposition of the film canisters, I am at a loss....

4/29/2006 05:17:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Doug 5:09
We called those "bucket recoveries" which were taken to blgd 213 NPIC, National Photographic Interpretation Center. I know the resolution but my secrecy oaths are still valid so I can't tell you. They were however very good. I'm sure John Pike's outfit on the web can give you a good estimate.
You could not see bikini lines or tell if they were implants though.

4/29/2006 05:19:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Just wondered. I asked my friend who worked on Aegenas for Lockheed the same question about 10 years ago.
He gave the same answer.
Now if I only knew Ms McCarthy!
Try #2:
Better or worse than what modern bird?

4/29/2006 05:24:00 AM  
Blogger Deuce ☂ said...


"Signora Fallaci then moves on to the livelier examples of contemporary Islam -- for example, Ayatollah Khomeini's "Blue Book" and its helpful advice on romantic matters: "If a man marries a minor who has reached the age of nine and if during the defloration he immediately breaks the hymen, he cannot enjoy her any longer." I'll say. I know it always ruins my evening. Also: "A man who has had sexual relations with an animal, such as a sheep, may not eat its meat. He would commit sin." Indeed. A quiet cigarette afterwards as you listen to your favourite Johnny Mathis LP and then a promise to call her next week and swing by the pasture is by far the best way. It may also be a sin to roast your nine-year-old wife, but the Ayatollah's not clear on that."

more at

4/29/2006 05:26:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Been away too long to know. My informed best "guess" is the magic stuff we have now is, well magic.

Which means of course,yes, bikini lines and implant confirmation!

4/29/2006 05:30:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

THAT's what we need to know!

4/29/2006 05:36:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Fallaci is a brave gal,broad,dame.

I also understand that if you have a "Kaaba-on" then it is a sin to use rubber boots to keep the sheep at the proper attitude.
So don't get your Kaaba-on unless you got rope.
This direct quote from Bahgdad Bob, taken from the diary of Yuri You-stuffum, noted adviser.

4/29/2006 05:38:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

habu_1 .... now playing the part of Ash and C4..

You running dog paper tiger. Everyone knows that the Trilateral Commission wrote Ms Albright's fourteen points as a ruse to invade Cuba and take over Venezuela. The NGO's are CIA proprietary companies put together to maintain the purity and essence of the current regime that occupies the UN and is run by the Omaha affiliates of the Hormel meat by product agents. Soon all this will become clear when Bush is treated to a tasty freeze.

4/29/2006 05:54:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

From the Lebanon's Daily Star

American soldiers should be gone from Iraq by the middle of 2008 as Iraqi forces take over security responsibilities, Iraq's National Security Adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie said Friday. In an interview, Rubaie said he expected current U.S. troops of roughly 133,000 to be cut to less than 100,000 by the end of this year and an "overwhelming majority" of U.S. forces should go home by the end of 2007 under a U.S.-Iraqi "road map" that calls for progressively handing over security to Iraqi forces.

"We have a road map, a condition-based agreement where by the end of his year the number of coalition forces probably will be less than 100,000.

"By the end of next year the overwhelming majority of coalition forces would have left the country and probably by middle of 2008 there will be no foreign soldiers in the country," he told Reuters. ... "

" middle of 2008 there will be no foreign soldiers in the country," ..."
seems we have already come to terms about the "status of forces" after the "Occupation", there will not be any.

" ... On Thursday, Iraq's incoming prime minister won the backing of Iraq's top Shiite cleric for his plan to disband militias, which the U.S. believes is the key to calming sectarian strife.

The endorsement of Maliki's plan came during a meeting in Najaf with Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. The ayatollah told Maliki that security should be his top priority. ... "

The militias will now be integrated with the ISF, as the US advisors are leaving.
The Command structure of the ISF will be compromised by the Militia Commanders, as they become Generals in the Army.

The Army will become a political instrument, not followiing the Turkish model, at all.

All in all, not the best of news.

4/29/2006 05:55:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

What did Mohammed say to his lover as he left the pasture,
"There will never be another ewe"

4/29/2006 05:59:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

'da Rat

Great work and info.

Unfortunately my quota light has gone from green to a flashing yellow..thank goodness I bought the Supreme coverage package which still gives me puce,lavender,orange,burnt umber and then RED

4/29/2006 06:05:00 AM  
Blogger Deuce ☂ said...


A pre-emptive mission to stop an imminent nuclear or chemical attack has been spun, tilted and twisted to a mission to democratize a tribal Islamic society. Reality has trumped hope.

4/29/2006 06:11:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

" ... HAVANA (AP) — Bolivian President Evo Morales joined Fidel Castro of Cuba and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela in Havana for Saturday's endorsement of a socialist trade initiative aimed at providing an alternative to U.S.-backed free trade efforts in Latin America. ... "

"... "We don't want to be rich, but we do want to live well, with dignity, as brothers, so there is no misery, so there is no poverty, so people are not excluded — that is among our fundamental objectives," Chavez said of the trade pact in Caracas on Friday, before leaving for Havana.

Chavez and Morales have warned in recent days that their countries could withdraw from the Andean Community if fellow trade-bloc members Colombia, Peru and Ecuador go through with free-trade pacts with the United States.

Chavez said in his Caracas speech Friday that Venezuela and Cuba would happily buy all the soybeans that Bolivia produces. Colombia — previously a key soybean market for Bolivia — recently signed a free trade pact with the United States and can now get soybeans at much lower prices, the Venezuelan president said.

Since a U.S.-backed FTAA fell apart last year, Washington has signed nine free trade agreements with Latin American countries. Ecuador is currently in negotiations.

"Listen, as long as the free trade pact (with the United States) threatens the small and medium-sized soy producers in Bolivia, ALBA will save them," Chavez said. "We'll take them by the hand and say, 'Come with us, we'll buy your soy beans, look at the difference.' "

Before leaving La Paz for Havana on Friday, Bolivian Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca said his government hoped that new commerce with Cuba and Venezuela would make up for any lost trade with the United States and the Andean Community. ... "

the USA Today

Remember, now, the US has basing rights in Ecuador and it is from there the anti cocca campaigns are waged. It is also in the top 10 countries we import oil from.

The pipeline in Ecuador was recently attacked by Communist insurgents, the Army is on alert and is attempting to control the situation.

In the early fall (September or October), the President of Iran is scheduled to meet with Mr Castro and Mr Chavez in Havana, bet Mr Morales shows up, also.

4/29/2006 06:13:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

2164 ...
The porcine Ben Frankin is often quoted. One of the recent favoritess is that "Beer is God's proof that he loves mankind"

A lesser known quote from Ben was
"Hope dies farting"..Bartletts or the back of Rolling Stone I can't remember which...

4/29/2006 06:18:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

" ... "The Iranian nation won't give a damn about such useless resolutions," Ahmadinejad told thousands of people Friday in northwestern Iran before the IAEA report was issued.

"Those who resort to language of coercion should know that nuclear energy is a national demand and by the grace of God, today Iran is a nuclear country," state-run television quoted him as saying.

On Saturday, Iran's deputy nuclear chief, Mohammad Saeedi, said uranium enrichment would continue and the country was installing two more 164-centrifuge cascades at its enrichment plant in Natanz. Iran successfully enriched uranium for the first time earlier this month, using 164 centrifuges.

But Saeedi said Tehran would be willing to allow the return of intrusive inspections of its nuclear facilities if the matter was returned to the IAEA. Iran banned such inspections in February after it was referred to the Security Council.

"If the issue is returned to the International Atomic Energy Agency, we will be ready to allow intrusive inspections," Saeedi told state-run television.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton took the toughest line, saying "the IAEA report shows that Iran has accelerated its efforts to acquire nuclear weapons although, of course, the report doesn't make any conclusions in that regard."

He told reporters the United States hopes to move "as a matter of urgency" and introduce a Chapter 7 resolution next week. It would give Iran "a very short" period to comply and halt enrichment.

"We're ready to proceed; we're ready to move expeditiously," Bolton said. "And what comes after that is largely in Iraq's hands. ... They have to comply or the Security Council is free to take other steps"

Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry called it "a calibrated approach which is reversible if Iran was prepared to comply fully with the wishes of the international community."

"A diplomatic solution is what we're all working for, and our patience must be pretty consistent there in order that we achieve that," he stressed.

China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya echoed the need for a diplomatic solution "because this region is already complicated ... and we should not do anything that would cause the situation (to be) more complicated."

He said the implication of a Chapter 7 resolution is clear: It will lead to a series of resolutions, complicating the situation and creating uncertainty. "I think whatever we do we should promote diplomacy," Wang said.

Russia's deputy U.N. ambassador Konstantin Dolgov told the Itar-Tass news agency that Moscow still sees no reason for a Chapter 7 resolution. He said the IAEA should stay in the lead on Iran and the Security Council should provide "political support" to the IAEA.

"Sanctions are not the way of resolving the Iranian problem, at least at the current stage, bearing in mind the information available," Dolgov was quoted as saying. ... "

They ain't gonna study War no more!
No sanctions, either the Chinese or Ruskies will veto the Chapter Resolution. The US will find NO political cover there.

The UN is just theater while Mr Bush decides the US course of action. His window to take action will be short, from December '06 to about March '07.
The political costs of preemptive actions outside that window will be prohibitve, even if a short campaign was "successful"

To paraphrase VDH, "it'd be War"

Not at all like Saddam's.

At least US troops could stay in the Region, after the Iraqi tell US to leave.

4/29/2006 06:25:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Just looked it up....Poor Richards, 1736...
"He that lives upon hope dies farting"

Good ole Ben

4/29/2006 06:27:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

the UN don't make threats

4/29/2006 06:31:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

"... Every Iraqi leader I met with -- including outgoing Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jafari, former prime minister Ayad Allawi and Deputy Prime Minister Ahmed Chalabi -- said that the Iraqi people's desire for a common future will avert a civil war.

Third, dangerous failures in Iraq's economic reconstruction are undermining progress on the security and political fronts. U.S. commanders are the first to admit that this war will not be won by the military alone. "You are not going to shoot yourself out of this problem," says Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, commander of daily operations in Iraq. Of the estimated $300 billion spent by Washington so far in Iraq, just $21 billion has been allocated for reconstruction, and perhaps half this amount has been redirected to pressing security needs. U.S. funding, which runs out this year just as a new Iraqi government will need to show tangible economic progress, is a small fraction of the estimated $70 billion to $100 billion that Iraqi reconstruction may ultimately require.

This strategic failure is a direct result of something else I observed: Only one element of the U.S. government -- the military -- seems to be treating Iraq as "the vital national interest" that President Bush declares it to be. Across Iraq, military personnel are heroically managing local reconstruction and development projects for which they lack the proper training or tools. Meanwhile, back in the Green Zone, hundreds of civilian positions -- from the departments of State, Justice, Commerce and Agriculture -- go unfilled.

U.S. commanders expressed frustration that dozens of Justice Department billets sit empty despite Iraq's urgent need for help in developing a functioning judicial system. American troops like my son describe risking their lives to arrest suspected insurgents, testifying in Iraqi courts and then watching in frustration as the offenders are tossed back on the streets. In government, as in business, refusing to devote the resources and personnel to a strategic priority is a recipe for disaster. ... "

From the WaPo by Joseph E. Robert Jr.

4/29/2006 06:38:00 AM  
Blogger BigLeeH said...

I was able to improve the photo a bit. The new version is in my Flickr account here. It's still not a good photo but Albright is visible, at least.

Feel free to use it if it is helpful. And, thanks, TigerHawk, for an interesting posting. There were two or three points in it on which I find myself in agreement with Ms Albright -- which brings her lifetime total to about five.

4/29/2006 06:45:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

In this new War, it is not young men and women that need to be drafted, but lawyers and engineers.

As Mr Rumsfeld said years ago, we have the wrong skill sets in Iraq.

It is the Peace that we have botched, not the War.
Mr Robert's piece describes how it's been botched, by US.
To much concern, in the Federal AG's office, about medical cannibas and not enough about America's vital interests in the real world.

Earth to President Bush...

4/29/2006 07:11:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Back to the Kellogg-Briand Pact.

It still remains in force in international law and binding under Article IV of the US Constitution.

Persia signed on July 2 1929.

It outlawed war...we have no problem folks ..go mow your lawns,have an ale,'s been on the books for years. Paper and jawboning always stop shooting from taking place. We got no worries.

4/29/2006 07:17:00 AM  
Blogger Voolfie said...

In re her 3rd point: With cash short, I'd spend it on military objectives first, then democratization once peace breaks out.
In re her 4th point: The U.N. has already gone the way of the League of Nations, it just doesn't know it yet. So who do we work with?
In re her 5th point: What does she consider the recent elections in Iraq where people braved death to vote?
In re her 7th point: Let's be careful how we define our terms. Without strong property rights and the absolute rule of law, it aint democracy.
In re her 10th point: democracy is such that it doesn't focus its attention until things get ugly. Everyone knows we should be exporting our revolution, but until we get attacked, it never makes it onto the to-do list. A new cold war mentality of containment would help us - since ultimately Islamo-fascism can't be defeated militarily. Her crack about W's focus on key battlegrounds ought to remind us how badly some of these swamps needed to be drained. To start talking to someone about democracy while he's fitting a detonator into a device doesn't sound too wise. Take the detonator away first, huh? Also, had we decided to work with the U.N. we would still be trying to get the inspectors back in there and we would still be catching flak about children killed by the sanctions. We need to abandon that organization and start a league of democracies.
In re her 12th point: She is being, at best, disingenuous.
The speech was by and large a political one.
I've no doubt that she and many like her get down on their knees at night and thank God that they didn't have to make the decisions that the current administration has had to.

4/29/2006 07:18:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

Once more a prominent Democrat has a forum for articulating her party's alternatives to the current administration's policy; once more a prominent Democrat can do no better than offer vacuous platitudes and self-evident truisms. Where's the beef?

May I suggest to Ms. Albright a fifteenth point: We should all work really, really hard for peace on earth.

I wouldn’t expect much better from the administration, though, in this the year of the mid-term – wouldn’t be prudent, too risky, don’t you know.

4/29/2006 07:28:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Ms Albright and her Team DID have to make decisions concerning the same issues the current Administration does.

They made drasticly different decisions.
Now whose decisions will be seen as having been "best", fifty years from now, is as Mr Rumsfeld puts it, an unknowable.
At least for now.

4/29/2006 07:29:00 AM  
Blogger Dan said...


4/29/2006 07:50:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

Father of the Bush Doctrine
George Shultz on pre-emption and the Revolt of the Generals
by DANIEL HENNINGER in the WSJ online.

4/29/2006 08:19:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

" ... Where does this leave the 11 million or so illegal immigrants living and working in the USA? Unfortunately, they are the pawns in the current debate, but not the central issue.

Let's hope there's a leader out there ready to focus on the bigger picture of the immigration debate... a picture that is welcoming, enforceable, and enforced.

If that person doesn't step forward, it's easy to envision an outcome that only a political junkie could love. Imagine that the nation remains bitterly divided between Republicans and Democrats. Then, a 3rd party candidate campaigns on immigration, picks up a few Southwestern states, and prevents either party's Presidential nominee from winning a majority of the Electoral College. Not a pretty picture. ... "

From a piece by Scott Rasmussen posted at RealClearPoliitics.
It is excellent in presenting the Border issues political components.

4/29/2006 08:50:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

More news from the world of the Religion of Piss Ants:

“due to their unfortunate misunderstanding of what their religion is really about, wayward Muslims killed close to fifteen thousand people for Allah last year.”
See: 14,500± Reasons That Islam Is Not Peaceful at

Also, don’t miss the excellent piece on “honor” amongst the practitioners of the Religion of Piffling Gnats:

“Nur Jehan was shot in the stomach, leg, knee and arm outside Karachi and left for dead by her cousins.” See: Your Daughters, Wives & Sisters, Not Your Honor at

4/29/2006 09:16:00 AM  
Blogger buddy larsen said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

4/29/2006 09:52:00 AM  
Blogger Bob Smith said...

2164th writes: The crisis in Christianity spawned democracy.

What a fascinating take [no attitude] - secularity filling the institutional void of a vacated - evacuated? - religion. Apropos of this approach is William Safire’s ‘Book of Job’, a short dissertation explaining his explanation of the story behind Job in the Bible. God targets Job for every misery in his divine arsenal - disease, death, pestilence. Job is left with nothing. He is angry and confused because he followed a righteous life, worshipping God and caring for his family. He begs God for an explanation that is not forthcoming. According to Safire, the moral of the story is man’s right to object to injustice - without waiting for the divine OK. God wanted his creatures to fly.

As for Ms Albright, my take is that Clinton entered the White House determined to spread the word of diversity in his appointees. As a group, their performance was not impressive. So the Beltway Boys come well within spitting distance of making a meritorious argument that politics, too, is best performed by professionals - who typically enter with much more than a grin and a can-do attitude.

4/29/2006 11:21:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

I meant to say:
re 4:21, meant to say:
"Too Half by Bright"
of course.

Fox-Halfbright '08!
"Dances with Nuts and Foxes"

4/29/2006 11:28:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Anyone remember how she explained the convincing way Bill fooled her into thinking that was Whipping Cream?
(Point 15?)

4/29/2006 11:30:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"Has old Franklin Ben Farting Again?"

4/29/2006 11:31:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

The Trials of Job Continue:
Keith Richards Hospitalized in New Zealand; 'Fell Out Of Palm Tree'..

4/29/2006 11:39:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Focus people...
Albright, first the name is all wrong Albright?
Then the football combine question.I'm sure her time in the 40 is slow but a 400lb. leg press.Center material, but can she be a long snapper?

And then what about Iran and the USA as signatories to the still in place Kellogg Briand Pact..are we just going to throw that document away?

Should the average investor short kabobs or write naked calls.
Where are these issues?

Also I hear Jimma Carter is countering the Minutemen's fence with a group building pedestrian walk overs. Got financing from Hugo Chavez and V.Fox.

4/29/2006 11:45:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

(loudspeaker annnouncer......HABU-1 now in for ASH)

well,yes the Kellog Briand Pact is my favorite. I like the cherry berry best with goats milk.
And how is it you think the Honorable Ms.Albright isn't already a long snapper. She was in the only administration that cared about that.
Finally you insult about Arab men and short kabobs. I'm really just,just mad.

4/29/2006 11:54:00 AM  
Blogger Bob Smith said...

Meme chose writes: The fact that these problems confront us is the whole problem with her approach - the perennial Democratic impulse to just talk around threats and in the end agree to anything (including giving away the store) just to 'get an agreement' (as she did with North Korea) is just disastrous. Electing people like this to office in today's world is the equivalent of walking into a knife fight armed with a stapler.

I’m trying to move away from the partisanship because both parties have problems. But this comment is insightful. There’s a ‘there’ there [god forbid we click our heels three times and wake up in Oakland.] The dialogue now is the Dems/Left co-opting all the thought and experience to emerge from the post-911 years as their own - when it was all in the public domain and essentially in real-time. The architecture of the 14 talking points is rational but owes its roots to the Republican initiative and experience - an experience which has changed with lightening speed [in bureaucratic years] in response to changing circumstances and unexpected developments, as per Wretchard‘s concept of the increasing adaptability of the military. So who’s doing the heavy lifting? My very personal opinion is that the thinkers are still paralyzed by the failures of the last century. Since confrontation is still the backbone of political power, the Left needs a rebuttal position. They seem to be co-opting what Bush started.

And I agree that the over-reliance on diplomatic solutions - treaties and such - is the triumph of hope over experience.

4/29/2006 11:57:00 AM  
Blogger trish said...

"A pre-emptive mission to stop an imminent nuclear or chemical attack has been spun..."

- 2164th

Is that what OIF was - a mission to pre-empt an imminent unconventional attack? News to me. News to the administration, too.

4/29/2006 12:13:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

1. WMD
2. Supports and harbors terrorists
3. Brutal suppresion of civilian populatioms
4. Non return of POWs from Kuwait occupation
5. Attempted assasination of Mr Bush 41
6. Firing on US aircraft
7. aQ members were known to be in Iraq
8. UN Resolution 678, 660, 687, 688, 949
9. "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677"
10. Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.
11. 9-11
12. restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region;

These are the listed reasons that the US is in Iraq.

As per the the Law that authorizes the Military to be engaged, in Iraq.

4/29/2006 12:32:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Desert Rat - In government, as in business, refusing to devote the resources and personnel to a strategic priority is a recipe for disaster. ... "

Well, the difference is Bush can't order American civilians to go over to Iraq from most US agencies - State and CIA obvious exceptions due to "hire-ins"
knowing they can end up in foreign posts.

So unlike the military, expected to salute and call all Bush military policy "sheer genius I have no public objection to" - a Commerce statistician or a Justice Dept lawyer are free to respond to a 2 year stint in Iraq request -- "are you crazy???"

Back in the early days, though, James Fallows and other writers loved the saga of the Green Zone as the eager children of "connected Republicans" who were selected from resumes they posted at the AEI and Heritage Foundation arrived. The "kids" - seeking an exciting resume adder before law school or business school - were put in charge of key Ministry functions despite being right out of college, not speaking Arabic, having no post-war Plan to follow, and no expertise in the area assigned.

Many happily talked to writers about how they had dozens of Ba'athists waiting for weeks on a translator so they could say what they wanted - usually jobs they couldn't get because they were Iraqi military officers who hadn't been screened - but the Republican kids had no place to send them because no screening program had been set up. But women arriving were supposed to get head of the line so more jobs went to women, so many officers learned this and brought their housewives in subsequent weeks.

The kids interfaced with Iraqi exiles if their job was important enough..otherwise used sign language or found some person that knew some English to translate. And pay was done by "Bremer's people" who handed out bricks of 100 dollar bills to this exile or that former Iraqi official - but who got bricks or not was never known until the US official made the call on the spot after a translated conversation on why they deserved the stacks of 100s..."It's for the children!!" was one good excuse to get the bills. One Heritage kid proudly said she had rewritten whole sections of construction code based on New Jerseys...and the Iraqis examining it had "made positive hand gestures" after seeing a translation. But she was headed to Brandeis Law in the fall, and had decided to leave early because the "heat here is incredible and living conditions were hard".

Ah, those were the days....

Not so many children of the connected and powerful showing up in Iraq these days..

Rat again - In this new War, it is not young men and women that need to be drafted, but lawyers and engineers.

Not to mention the need for Americans that understand the language and culture.

But American civilians have been told "our part" in this Long War is to shop more, enjoy our tax cuts, and "cheer the hero troops". No more than that. No effort to train Americans in those critical skills. Two years into the war with Japan, we already had 6 military and 8 government-funded schools teaching soldiers, engineers, lawyers, administrators Japanese language and cultural skills.

Nor does our government have a way to pay bureaucrats the 350K equivalent that the government contractors are paying in the private sector for people to do the same job that we cannot Draft people to do for 1/7th the cost because No One Thinks This War Is Important Enough to Sacrifice Anything For (outside the volunteer military). And all too frequently, we have military officers and NCOs doing the civilian sector work they are not trained to because the Bushies are unwilling to pressure civilians to come to Iraq to do it...

In the same way that Tommy Franks War Plan ended with the Fall of Baghdad ---then "Magic happens!" - people blow off a little steam, head back to their Iraqi jobs on Monday, and cheap oil pays for the "Liberation".......somehow "noble purple-fingered freedom-loving Iraqis" by simply voting, would open an instant "magic" can of democracy and Western-style enlightened rule. For three years, Iraq has been a botched Bushie "No Postwar Plan" trying to recover from no leadership, no goals, no US civilians trained in critical skills.

Looks like we are headed for a "get the hell out and don't let the door hit you on the ass" declaration in 2008 from the Iraqis. No basing rights outside what we can do on the side with the Kurds.

So are there any "lessons learned" being applied to the civilian side of US gov't getting ready for Iran or some other Arab nation in the "Long War"? Arab or Farsi language schools belatedly opening free to US citizens willing to take future roles in "Our Defining Struggle".


Shop. Enjoy your tax cuts. Cheer the hero troops. Wait on the next President, and hope she or he has a clue...

4/29/2006 12:33:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

How about a Thong Snapper?
Wear that thong outside,
Insert Football, Stretch,
and Launch between them powerful limbs.

4/29/2006 01:57:00 PM  
Blogger blert said...

Thankyou DR

I can see that the WaPo has arrived at where I was months ago:

The Army has independent construction battalions. It now ought to organize specialty normalization battalions. They would be infused with soft power talent, with a hefty weighting towards women, and those over thirty. Physical training should be de-emphasized with these formations. Their priorities: translators, trades instructors, accountants, bookkeepers, bankers, estimators, civil engineers, police, jurists-… etc.

There role would be to boot-up civil society in areas where our civilians can’t operate. This type of formation would be open to civilian retirees from these fields. They need to be in uniform and under military control so that they can be in the loop of military decision: insiders not outsiders. These experts need to be on the military net so as to request support in the case of attack or crisis. Unlike other formations, there would be few slots for privates, and no career track for officers.

Normalization battalions would be used to boot up technical schools, teachers colleges, trade schools, attend to smaller construction projects ( OJT ), legal records, surveys, etc. Think of it as the Peace Corps where it’s too dangerous to be a civilian and where an intense surge of activity is needed integrated into liberation strategy.

Expect the Normalization Battalions to be top heavy with sergeants and officers, so what. This is a brains and talent outfit, not combat.

Being in uniform, these troops would be in the loop and able to get additional manpower on short notice, as the Commanding General saw fit. This is a boot up battalion that can get the civilian sector going without red tape and normal conventions.

Many a bridge carries the made by USA label. Now that label can be attached to schools, banks, etc.

A starting point in virtually every failed state: land surveys and records. They ought to be of the same priority as registering voters.

4/29/2006 03:42:00 PM  
Blogger desert rat said...

that may be just what is needed, if we are to end the "Long War" on terms favorable to US.

4/29/2006 04:04:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Blert - There may be merit in out of shape, female heavy battalions full of "soft skills". Led by officers who are off any career track.

I just don't see any.

1. Saying we should emphasize having women tell Muslim men in a patriacrchal society what to do and how to do it is like saying we should have our rape counselors in America telling women what do do and how to handle their feelings be predominantly black males with a military or athletic background. "Suck it up, woman! You can beat this!"

2. Putting officers in charge of leading your older women with no promotional track or career consequences for excelling in a critical nation-building mission or screwing one up totally doesn't seem to add up.

3. Creating a military corps of people with scant military skills but adept at nursery school management and other similar skills would bloat the DOD budget and make an E-7 paratrooper responsible for 16 other lives in combat wonder why he makes the same pay as a plump gay guy who is supposed to be a whiz at getting 3rd World restaurant fare more hygenic in nation-building.

4. We should first understand cultures, and get past our silly notions of "freeing women from their burquas" as a military objective and notions of a Young Republican for Freedom telling a gathering of desert chieftans that their ways of doing business would never work in Texas..


I would suggest tapping a ready reservoir of skills. In the last 20 years we took in wads and wads of culturally familiar, fluent Arab, Spanish, Pashtun, Chinese, Farsi, Urdu speakers.

They are called refugees. And are entitled to a panopoly of US goodies like free health care, free college, refugee housing assistance and welfare. So what's the problem of saying we will let you in and give you the goodies you came for - as long as you commit to at least 2 members of your family serving a 4 year military, critical overseas civilian skill job, or 10 years as a paid law enforcement "advisor" here.

Any refugee that rejects a few years of national service as part of the deal in being let in obviously doesn't "fear persecution" that much and can stay in Pakistan, Egypt, Haiti, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, N Korea, Iran or Cuba if that's their attitude.

Add in that besides "natives" repatriating to rebuild their country, we need a core of trained native Americans that can come from the workforce and through college. Plenty of blue collar contractors with critical skills work without health coverage in the US given for free to illegals or welfare clients - millions would sign up for a possibility of being drafted to weekend teamwork exercises 3 years of cumulative overseas service, with 2 months domestic service credited as 1 month overseas obligation in disaster recoveries - if their families could get a better deal in America on medical and dental care.

And colleges? Have the ROTC program expanded to bring in a technical corps with huge computer and language skills - offering free courses for the adept - in return for limited national service. (One month a year consults with longer terms only when Congress declares true war - not a "tax break, shop like crazy for America" - type of war exists...) For the truly gifted who are judged to have awesome skills in a Long War and for the coming struggle with Rising China - offer them full tuition, semesters overseas free, a decent stipend...and again...given many don't want a 20-year military hitch...a leg up in the military OR other national service.


On the down side, Poland and Italy, recognizing the "Bushies" botched it - are on track to be completely out of "noble, purple-fingered, freedom-loving" Iraq by the end of 2006. Romano Prodi of Italy is sticking to "honor" on his election - no sudden withdrawal, but Italians leaving the field in intervals with heads high.

The UK's "hunker-down" strategy cost them 1/17th the casualties the Americans took, and the UK has only burned up 20 billion vs. the 300 billion Bush borrowed from China, Saudi Arabia, France, and Japan to fight "our part" while keeping tax cuts to his cronies going. Jack Straw is saying loudly that the UK will not be militarily with Bush if Bush went unilaterally, outside the UN, Nato, even Parliament and the US Congess into war with Iran.

While Straw is fully committed to diplomacy, as is Blairs replacement Sir Brown, UK diplomacy is not as beholden to Israel as the US is. Meaning the Brits think the Zionists started the ME nuclear arms race and the only solution is a A&H Bomb free ME, same as we have kept Latin America, Asian Tigers+Japan, and Africa from having one nation with nukes driving 6 more to get nukes and achieve parity...

US + 3 key allies of the now-amusing "Coalition of the Willing" in the 45 nations Bush declared were "with us" are left. All seem to have little confidence and will soon peel off like Spain, Netherlands, El Salvador, Denmark, Tonga, Japan, and S. Korea did.

Leaving Maximum War Leader Bush to pump tractor-trailer loads of US taxpayer dollars to "wealthy Corporate Doer Folks"- who fully understand getting war profits and gettin peacetime gravy...

4/29/2006 07:03:00 PM  
Blogger sbw said...

Would it cost Secretary Albright too much to spend point 15 explaining WHY democracy is important?

4/29/2006 08:59:00 PM  
Blogger blert said...


Just can't use the young.

Peace Corps found that out the hard way decades ago.

Athletic condition of the volunteers seemed to work backwards. Able bodied Corps volunteers didn't have enough experience and tended to get too involved trying to be the manual labor.

None of the labor pools that you proffer fit the need.

Inre gals teaching men in the muslime world: it's a straw woman argument. You need the women to train native females: something that is a gapping hole right now.

You're not so much as smart as 100% contrary: straight out of Little Big Man.

Get help.

4/29/2006 10:20:00 PM  
Blogger buddy larsen said...

...favorite scene, Little Big Man and Custer's conversation just before the command rode down into the valley of the Little Bighorn. LBM tried to tell him, but the General just couldn't help preferring to be out-thought by himself rather than chance being out-thought by the truth.

4/29/2006 10:48:00 PM  
Blogger Mad Fiddler said...

Anyone who is discouraged at the relentless rehash by the left of its litany of transgressions and mis-steps by the Bush administration might take some comfort in reading “Mig Pilot.” It's the biography of Viktor Belenko, the Russian fighter pilot who defected to Japan with a Mig-25 in the mid-1970’s.

He recounts that the final straw that helped him realize the extent of the lies spun by the soviet government was seeing that after all the common people of the United States were able to depose their leader in a completely bloodless and civilized process, when they tired of him. This brute fact contradicted all the mythology the soviet government had persistently promoted that the people of the US were oppressed and enslaved by their Capitalist, Fascist government, and could not make choices for themselves

Eventually, the lies of the left cannot obscure all the internal contradictions of their assertions.

The people of the world may not like Bush, but they are not stupid.

5/02/2006 10:58:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger