The latest generation of missile technology currently being engineered by Iranian scientists will be able to reach the continental United States, former Israeli ambassador to the U.N. Dore Gold said Saturday.
Asked what Israel would do if Tehran began producing nuclear weapons, Gold told the Fox News Channel's Cal Thomas: "This is not just an Israeli problem. The missiles being developed in Iran have a range that goes well beyond Israel."
"Certainly they have the Shihab-3 missile, with a range of 1,300 kilometers, that can strike Israel," he said. "But they're developing the Shihab-4 for hitting Europe and a Shihab-5, with Russian missile technology, that can strike the Eastern Seaboard of the United States."
Gold called Iran's capacity to launch a nuclear attack on most of the Western world a "global problem [for] which European governments, the United States and Israel have to come up with a solution."
#1
"But they’re developing the Shihab-4 for hitting Europe and a Shihab-5, with Russian missile technology, that can strike the Eastern Seaboard of the United States."
Gold called Iran’s capacity to launch a nuclear attack on most of the Western world a "global problem [for] which European governments, the United States and Israel have to come up with a solution."
Nothing that several dozen rounds of endless negotiations can't solve.
#2
And helping them out with their economic downturn.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/12/2004 21:41
Comments ||
Top||
#3
One of their missiles might reach the U.S.
I don't have enough fingers and toes to count how many of our missiles will reach Iran in return.
They'd better think long and hard about whether they really want to do this. It would be the last goddam thing the mullahs (and unfortunately a lot of other Iranians) would ever do.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/12/2004 21:41
Comments ||
Top||
#4
I doubt thinking will accomplish anything: they're probably still convinced the Great Satan is powerless to do anything about their ambitions.
At some point, we're gonna have to do something to drive the message home: Jimmy Carter isn't in charge here anymore.
Frankly, I think we shoulda done it on 9/12.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
12/12/2004 21:55
Comments ||
Top||
#5
Chirac and the EU wanted international credibility vv IRAN-IAEA and non-American involvement, so how is Chirac and the EU gonna respond to potens Iranian mushrooms over Euro-cities? Clearly Chirac, etal. badly miscalculated in thinking that helping Saddam move and hide his WMD caches in order to discredit America for Socialism/OWG meant FRANCE, etal. was NOT in any danger from Radical Islam. Chirac, like even Radical Islam, has to learn that EVERYONE AND ANYONE IS EXPENDABLE-POL DENIABLE SAVE FOR RUSSIA-CHINA AND COMMUNISM - HELPING DESTROY AND SUBORN AMERICA IS NOT GOING TO SAVE FRANCE, ETAL FROM FUTURE SOVIETIZATION, COMMUNIZATION, STALINIZATION, and ASIANIZATION! The International Lefts has NOT given up on Mackinder's "World Island" concept by a long long LONG SHOT.
The world can now count on one geopolitical earthquake every 10 years.
Between 1985 and 1995, it was the fall of the Berlin Wall, the implosion of the Soviet Union, the collapse of Communist parties the world over, and America's emergence as the world's only superpower. Between 1995 and 2005, it was the 9/11 attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that triggered a war on, and the defeat of, Afghanistan's despotic Taliban regime followed by a war on, and the defeat of, Saddam Hussein's bloody tyranny. So between 2005 and 2015, what's on the global menu?
Movers and shakers as well as long-range thinkers and planners meet in a wide variety of intelligence and think tank huddles. These over-the-horizon, out-of-the-box appraisals range from good news scenarios (the minority) to the kind of global unraveling funk whose only antidote would be the shelter and solace of a desert island.
Behind all the geopolitical jargon about the "functioning core of globalization," "system perturbations," and "dialectics of transformation," there is the underlying fear of a Vietnam-like debacle in Iraq that would drive the United States into isolationism - a sort of globalization in reverse.
Among the most interesting and optimistic librettos in the game of nations is peace in the Middle East made possible by a deal with Iran. Keeping this kind of negotiation with the ayatollahs secret in the age of the Internet and 4 million bloggers taxes credulity. It would also take a Kissinger or a Brzezinski to pull it off. However, if successful, it would look something like this:
-- A nuclear Iran removed from the "axis of evil," and recognized as the principal player in the region, is the quid.
-- For the quo, Iran agrees to recognize Israel and the two-state solution that establishes a "viable" Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.
-- Iran ends all support for terrorist activities against Israel. Iran-supplied and funded Hezbollah disarms and confines its activities to the political and economic arena in Lebanon.
In reality, Iran is automatically the region's dominant power after U.S. armed forces withdraw from Iraq. The Shia side of Islam, long the persecuted majority in Iraq, will emerge victorious in forthcoming free national elections. A minimum of 1 million Iranians have moved into Iraq since Operation Iraqi Freedom 2œ years ago. The Iran-Iraq border is porous, mountainous, largely unguarded, and no one has even an approximate count. The Jordanian intelligence service believes the Iranian influx into Iraq could be as high as 3 million.
In Syria, the Alawi regime, in power since 1970, is also a Shia sect of Islam. In Lebanese politics, the Hezbollah party is a Shia movement. The oilfields of Saudi Arabia are located in the eastern province of the kingdom where, Shia are the majority - and Iran is a hop, skip and jump away.
One all too realistic geopolitical nightmare scenario was a WMD terrorist attack on the West Coast. A nuclear device detonates in a container ship about to enter Long Beach in California. News had just broken about the pollution of the U.S. food supply, and most analysts assumed transnational terrorism was behind it. The United States can kick butts anywhere, but seems helpless in coping with asymmetrical warfare.
In quick succession:
-- The dollar ceases to be the world's reserve currency
-- The shaky coalition that governs Iraq collapses, and civil war breaks out between Sunni and Shia
-- The fear of the unknown produces a new consensus in the United States that global civilization is no longer America's business.
-- The debate in the United States shifts to the requirements for adequate city perimeter defenses.
-- Now that the United States is no longer the global cop, the defense budget of almost half a trillion dollars can be drastically pruned and savings transferred to homeland security.
-- U.S. client states are informed they are now on their own. Congress abolishes the global aid function.
-- Egypt loses its annual stipend of $2.5 billion; Taiwan and Israel are told they will now have to fend for themselves.
-- Social trust becomes the new glue of society - bonding with like-minded neighbors that share each other's values.
-- International coalitions dissolve and new ones emerge. China seizes new opportunities for its short- and long-range needs for raw materials in the developing world - from Brazil to sub-Sahara's pockets of mineral wealth.
-- The United States, Canada and Mexico form a new stand-alone alliance with Britain.
-- Turkey, Israel and Iran become a new core group for self-protection against dysfunctional neighbors that have no upward mobility.
-- The European Union and Russia, in continuing decline, close ranks; the EU inherits de facto responsibility for Africa south of the Sahara, plagued by genocidal wars and the AIDS epidemic.
-- China and India, with one-third of the world's population, and competitive with Western countries in high-tech jobs and technology, move into a de facto alliance.
-- Pakistan's pro-American President Pervez Musharraf does not survive the 9th assassination plot; an Islamist general takes over and appoints Dr. A. Q. Khan, the former CEO of an international nuclear black market for the benefit of America's "axis of evil" enemies, as Pakistan's new president.
-- The House of Saud is shaken to its foundations as a clutch of younger royal princes, who have served in the armed forces, arrest the plus 70-year-olds now in charge - known as the Sudairi seven - and call for the kingdom's first elections.
-- Osama Bin Laden returns to Saudi Arabia, where he is welcomed as a national hero. Bin Laden scores an overwhelming plurality in the elections and is now the most popular leader in the country.
-- Dr. A. Q. Khan sends Bin Laden a message of congratulations and dispatches his new defense minister, Gen. Hamid Gul -- a former intelligence chief and admirer of the world's most wanted terrorist, who hates America with a passion -- to Riyadh. His mission is to negotiate a caliphate that would merge Pakistan's nuclear weapons with Saudi oil resources and monetary reserves.
-- Northern Nigeria sends a message to Islamabad and Riyadh requesting that it be considered as a member of the caliphate.
-- Absent the long-time global cop, and traditional alliances in shambles, transnational criminal enterprises thrive as they enjoy unfettered access the world over.
-- U.S. multinational companies, unable to protect their plants and employees, devolve back whence they came.
-- International airlines morph back into inter-regional air links.
-- Switzerland, a small defensive country with compulsory military service, is in vogue again; larger countries with several ethnic groups begin breaking down a la Yugoslavia.
-- Goods stamped "Made in China. Secured in Singapore" are back in business, smuggled into the United States.
-- The EU can no longer cope with millions of North Africans and sub-Sahara Africans flooding into Spain, Italy, France, who then roam freely and hungry in the rest of Europe. Islamist radicals sally out of their European slum tenements to join the siege of U.S. Embassies to protest their jobless plight.
-- Japan goes nuclear after U.S. troops are withdrawn from South Korea.
A slight detour from this global ship o' fools imaginary cruise had Pakistan and India, no longer restrained by the United States, stumbling into miscalculation and exchanging a nuclear salvo over Kashmir. One billion Indians survive minus one city, Islamabad. Pakistan, part of India prior to independence in 1947, collapses as a unitary state, and becomes part of India again.
To be warned is forewarned. Short of WMD terrorism, the intelligence insiders are concerned about implosions in the former Soviet Muslim republics. They also say there is no more important objective for the Bush 43B Administration than to repair transatlantic relations. Chris Patten, the EU's outgoing foreign minister says, "The world deserves better than testosterone on one side and superciliousness on the other."
Posted by: tipper ||
12/12/2004
8:58:47 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[24 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Many of these scenarios violate a principal of planning, "Never allow your opponent a single advantage." In other words, if they have an advantage, it is not through your permitting it, actively or passively. These scenarios also are scant in predicting possible major armed conflicts and regime changes. For example, there will be a US foreign policy under a republican administration.
#2
Many of these scenarios don't pass the "WTF?" test.
"The debate in the United States shifts to the requirements for adequate city perimeter defenses"
Yeah, right, can't wait to bring up the issue of the type of crennelation we need on our defensive walls,and how deep the moat should be, at the next town meeting.
Posted by: Carl in N.H. ||
12/12/2004 10:22
Comments ||
Top||
#3
Don't forget the asteroid impact or the dreaded global warming rising of the oceans sending coastal areas under hundreds of feet of water.
May you live in interesting times.
Posted by: Don ||
12/12/2004 10:24
Comments ||
Top||
#4
Carl, be sure you store enough food to withstand a seige (or cable TV outage...or some other calamity)
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 10:27
Comments ||
Top||
#5
ima have 472 gigabytes of 80s video stored against the day the cable is destroy
#6
I realy wish these LLLs would stop masturbating like this in public. The days when we would retreat into "Fotress America" are as over as the antebellum south. With the exception of a few hollyweird types, most of the american people know what the stakes are. For comparison, look at what happend at the nadir of the post vietnam period, the carter presidency. we most definately did not retreat into a shell. We may have been not quite as aeffective as we are today, but we were involved and busy bothering the rest of the planet.
A nuking scenario like this would more likely trigger an invasion of Iran/Norkland/wherever as the highest likelyhood. Much less likely, but a very real possibility would be a demonstration saturation nuclear bombardment of one of the usual suspects. As for EU, putty, et al, there would be a deathly silence waitning for our response. We would prolly finish up by enunciating some variation on "no Izzy/failed/semi-unfriendly state will be allowed to have any kind of nuclear tech. period" policy. Enforced with preemtive zapping of capitals/rulers.
While I hope nothing like this ever happens, it would be....entertaining, i guess, to see the usuaal suspects fall all over themselves trying to convince us it wudn't them.
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/12/2004 11:52
Comments ||
Top||
#7
Another bunch of morons who don't understand that most social change is just the expression of technology changes. To take one example, standoff precision weapons means the possesor can systematically destroy a country's power and communications infrastructure at minimal risk. Its real hard to run a country without telephones and electricity.
#8
The days when we would retreat into "Fotress America" are as over as the antebellum south
Yes, but one should never underestimate the appeal of isolationism's siren song to Americans of both left and right. It's the flip side of John Winthrop's City on a Hill: in the world but not of it, free of the taint of old world corruption, back to the garden, etc. Appeals as much to Susan Sontag et al as to Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot.
#9
Appeals as much to Susan Sontag et al as to Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot.
I know. However, the previous examples are marginalized. In a country of approx~ 300M persons there are going to be some number of people like this. A small number, but a noisy number.
I'm looking at the end result of policy decisions, and people like Perot and Sontag (now theres a match made in...somewhere!) have little or no input into policy decisions.
The city on a hill, in the world but not of it does have its appeal, and a lot of people, including me would like to tell the rest of the planet to f__k off. But I, and by extension I hope the majority of Americans also understand that the world is not going to let us stay aloof. We're too much of a temptation, and as a result we have to be active in the world, if only out of self preservation. If in the process we make the world a little better, well thats just gravy, and makes the nasty bits of the job easier to endure.
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/12/2004 16:01
Comments ||
Top||
#10
Since this is Arnaud de Borchgrave, someone who once seemed to be quite erudite - now seeming to be so full of himself he's liable to explode, nothing in it surprises me.
Much wild-eyed conjecture, so little revealed logic behind it. Individual items could, indeed, playout... but equally likely (more so?) would be the Mother Ship returns to take us all home.
It's hard to accept that Benador Assoc "houses" such a bandwidth - from Mansoor Ijaz to Arnaud - that's some spectrum.
#11
Maybe in the world of that author a nuke on US soil resutls in a restreat to a defensive core.
But "Jacksonian" america is going to take the gloves off - and several places in the Middle east will be given ultimatums: Kill these Islamofascists off yourselves, or the next nuclear detonation will be 100KT at 500m over the main mosque in your capital, simultaneously with 3 1MT detonations at 100m over Mecca.
Simple as that - this guy doesnt understand the "Jacksonian" mindset that dominates in times liek that - its the same mindset that dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the one that sent flamethrowers after the Japanese in bunkers when they would not surrender, the same mindset that won Iwo Jima in spite of the cost so that we could bomb all the cities in Japan flat, then burn the rubble with incendiary bombs. Its the mindset that is shown by Alvin York, Audie Murphy, Carlos Hathcock, Shugart & Gordon, and the current btrave warriors in Afghanistan and Iraq.
*THAT* is the mindset that would be loosed upon the Islamist's world - one that will, like Grant, accept nothing but the complete and unconditional surrender and remaking of the poisoned culture of Islam, or, failing htat, its complete and permanent eradication, root and branch, from the earth.
The world has yet to the the American people in full fury - but if they pop a nuke on us, they will see horrors they had never imagined, unleashed upon them; Delivered harshly and coldly, from a determined and angry people bent on the eradication of that threat to its children, homes and society.
#12
These are just PC "Pipe Dreams", whims and whists, morso since the Failed Left itself has no intention of allowing or tolerating most or all of these scenarios. The USA cannot be in "isolation" because the Failed Left and Commie Clintons are out to force Socialism, OWG, and Empire on the USA, i.e. GLOBAL INTEGRATION, by any means necessary. The International Lefts are so desperate and power-mad/obsessed they are willing to work for a global empire of the failed and failing, not of the successful, let alone one of the prosperous. They are forcing and tricking America into accomplishing the historically GLOBAL agenda of [revolutionary]International Leftism-Socialism-Communism-Progressive while Communism-centric Russia-China modernize, whereupon US power will be finally usurped and suborned once America is sufficiently destabilized, no different than what the Clintons and LeftMedias did to the Reagan-Republican economy, validating its superiority once a DemLib became POTUS but giving themselves the full credit for same instead of to Reagan, GOP-Rightism or even DemoCapitalism. Bill Clinton validated and justified Leftism-Socialism once, before, and forever, unto eternity, and thus by extens also validating ditto for GLOBAL SOCIALISM, GLOBAL WELFARISM-SUBSIDISM, GLOBAL INEGRATION AND CENTRALISM, and GLOBAL OWG, etc. NO MATTER THEIR PC RHETORIC, NOR WHETHER USURPED OR NOT, THE LEFT WILL GEN NOT TOLERATE, NOR ACCEPT, THE USA NOT ENGAGING OR WARRING FOR GLOBAL EMPIRE! When Putin and Russia, now includ China, talk about waging PREVENTIVE, MIL-BASED MEASURES ags terror or to protect ags terror, THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT THE USA, i.e. ATTACKING THE USA-NORAM, IFF ONLY BY PC "MISTAKE" ala the USA in IRAQ-AFGHANISTAN ["NO WMDS IN IRAQ/ME"], NO MATTER HOW MANY ISLAMISTS ARE PC OR VERIFIABLY/MERITOR WIPED OUT! Remember, "Justified" US Global Empire = the USA is a ROGUE that must itself be inevitably and finally destroyed, "CONSTRAINED/SUBORNED AND CONTROLLED" as was said in PRAVDA. Americans must prepare for "...the day when AMerica is no longer the BIG BOY on the block" - you know, Bill Clinton's hatred of California-based BIG BOY-label restaurant food, the burgers that gave him heart problems!
#13
There is this common assumption that the US could not retaliate if terrorists attacked US w/nuclear weapon. It is far more likely that a "kill 'em all and let God sort them out" policy would follow. First,I would expect every terrorist camp in world to be hit in short order. Diplomatic niceties would be ignored by US. Iran,Syria,Saudi Arabia would be given ultimatums to immediately stop financing terrorists and to turn over any terrorists in their countries. Any nation sponsoring Islamic terrorists could expect a wave of missile attacks turning out the lights. Widespread condemnation of US actions could lead to US leaving UN,w/the funds US spend on Un going to defense build-up and direct foreign aid to countries helping US.
Posted by: Stephen ||
12/13/2004 0:05
Comments ||
Top||
#14
Maybe in the world of that author a nuke on US soil resutls in a restreat to a defensive core.
But "Jacksonian" america is going to take the gloves off - and several places in the Middle east will be given ultimatums: Kill these Islamofascists off yourselves, or the next nuclear detonation will be 100KT at 500m over the main mosque in your capital, simultaneously with 3 1MT detonations at 100m over Mecca.
Simple as that - this guy doesnt understand the "Jacksonian" mindset that dominates in times liek that - its the same mindset that dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the one that sent flamethrowers after the Japanese in bunkers when they would not surrender, the same mindset that won Iwo Jima in spite of the cost so that we could bomb all the cities in Japan flat, then burn the rubble with incendiary bombs. Its the mindset that is shown by Alvin York, Audie Murphy, Carlos Hathcock, Shugart & Gordon, and the current btrave warriors in Afghanistan and Iraq.
*THAT* is the mindset that would be loosed upon the Islamist's world - one that will, like Grant, accept nothing but the complete and unconditional surrender and remaking of the poisoned culture of Islam, or, failing htat, its complete and permanent eradication, root and branch, from the earth.
The world has yet to the the American people in full fury - but if they pop a nuke on us, they will see horrors they had never imagined, unleashed upon them; Delivered harshly and coldly, from a determined and angry people bent on the eradication of that threat to its children, homes and society.
#15
Maybe in the world of that author a nuke on US soil resutls in a restreat to a defensive core.
But "Jacksonian" america is going to take the gloves off - and several places in the Middle east will be given ultimatums: Kill these Islamofascists off yourselves, or the next nuclear detonation will be 100KT at 500m over the main mosque in your capital, simultaneously with 3 1MT detonations at 100m over Mecca.
Simple as that - this guy doesnt understand the "Jacksonian" mindset that dominates in times liek that - its the same mindset that dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the one that sent flamethrowers after the Japanese in bunkers when they would not surrender, the same mindset that won Iwo Jima in spite of the cost so that we could bomb all the cities in Japan flat, then burn the rubble with incendiary bombs. Its the mindset that is shown by Alvin York, Audie Murphy, Carlos Hathcock, Shugart & Gordon, and the current btrave warriors in Afghanistan and Iraq.
*THAT* is the mindset that would be loosed upon the Islamist's world - one that will, like Grant, accept nothing but the complete and unconditional surrender and remaking of the poisoned culture of Islam, or, failing htat, its complete and permanent eradication, root and branch, from the earth.
The world has yet to the the American people in full fury - but if they pop a nuke on us, they will see horrors they had never imagined, unleashed upon them; Delivered harshly and coldly, from a determined and angry people bent on the eradication of that threat to its children, homes and society.
Ukraine's Opposition leader, Viktor Yushchenko, has arrived back in Kiev to resume campaigning in the lead-up to his country's repeat presidential election this month. Mr Yushchenko was discharged from a Vienna clinic overnight where it was confirmed he had been the victim of dioxin poisoning. Mr Yushchenko thanked his doctors and said he was happy to be alive. His once healthy-looking face is now barely recognisable and the disfigurement is one of the symptoms of dioxin poisoning. That is the diagnosis given by the doctors in Austria. They say his recovery will be long and difficult but the presidential candidate has returned to Ukraine and the campaign trail. Mr Yushchenko is confident of winning the poll and analysts say the doctors' findings have boosted his chances.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
7:35:23 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has been approached to become the next head of the United Nation's nuclear watchdog, according to the the Washington Post. The newspaper says the Bush administration wants the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed El Baradei, to step down. The article says the US asked Mr Downer several months ago if he would consider the job but he apparently refused to challenge Dr El Baradei. The Post reports that the US has bugged Dr El Baradei's phone calls with Iranian officials in its bid to push him out of the job.
Hardliners within the Bush administration think Dr El Baradei is too soft on Iran but Democrat Senator Joe Biden is concerned. "It's a very slippery, dangerous slope as we're trying to re-establish ourselves as a player in the international community," he said. "I'd be very careful if I were them." "I agree with the administration, [Dr El Baradei] is going a little too slow with Iran but this is really a dangerous and slippery slope."
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
7:34:13 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Today George Will proclaimed Biden a rare responsible voice within his party on foreign affairs.
In this article we learn that Biden is mildly worried about Iranian nukes, but that calling for the replacement of a corrupt, ineffectual UN bureaucrat who tried to interfere in a US presidential election is 'really dangerous.'
I don't know what's scarier: that, compared to Michael Moore or Al Gore, Biden is in fact more responsible or that their party got 48% of the vote.
#2
"we’re trying to re-establish ourselves as a player in the international community"
WTF? Biden isn't some rational mildly liberal Dhimmidonk, he's a Moron who's pandering to whom he realizes runs (owns? lol!) the Dhimmidonk Party. If he had only half Lieberman's integrity... Oh, yeah, he's also a Chia Pet.
An explosion in a crowded southern Philippines market has killed at least 14 people and injured 60 others. The motive for the attack is not yet clear.
I'd say the Bad Guys wanted to kill a bunch of people. What do you think?
Police have cordoned off the area and are investigating the type of explosive used. They would not speculate about who was responsible but said there had been recent reports of threats by Muslim rebels from Abu Sayyaf. The group best known for kidnappings for ransom is linked to the regional militant network Jemaah Islamiah but the Mayor of General Santos said the explosion could stem from a feud between two groups of stall owners at the market.
Yah. I had a feud going with the lady in the cubicle next to mine last week. Blew her right up.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
7:31:28 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[17 views]
Top|| File under:
The row over America's failure to send enough military vehicles to Iraq took a new twist yesterday when the company that manufactures them said it could deliver 1,200 more a year, but has had no request from the Pentagon. Two days earlier, Donald Rumsfeld, was bluntly confronted by an Iraq-bound National Guardsman at what was meant to be a pep rally with the Defence Secretary at a US staging base in Kuwait. Instead, Mr Rumsfeld was hit by a barrage of pointed questions, first about the extended tours of duty driving down the morale of service personnel in Iraq, then over the lack of properly armoured Humvees to protect them from the roadside bombs that are the insurgents' weapon of choice.
Hours after President George Bush reiterated that soldiers in Iraq would get everything they needed, Congress released a report showing that only 6,000 of the near-20,000 Humvees in service in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait were fully protected. The House Armed Services Committee said most of the transport trucks that carried fuel, food and ammunition to dangerous parts of Iraq were unarmoured. That shortcoming has been seized on the guerrillas who have killed more than 1,000 US soldiers and marines since Mr Bush prematurely declared an end to the conflict in May, 2003. Thousands more have been maimed and wounded.
Bush didn't declare an end to the conflict in May, 2003, prematurely or maturely. He pronounced that part of the mission accomplished. I love watching propaganda memes evolve. I'd also point out that there's no army in the world that has a fully armored inventory, and add that the thrust is toward lighter, more mobile vehicles, like the Humvee. And changing the weight that the vehicles lug around also changes fuel consumption, lubrication requirements, parts wear lives, and probably a few dozen other things that aren't occurring to me off the top of my head. Money's got to be allocated to cover those things, too. Armoring everything, to include POL trucks, the cook truck, and the Colonel's jeep, is a pretty significant — not to mention expensive — move.
A spokesman for Armor Holdings, which makes the fully protected Humvees, said: "We have always said, 'Tell us how much you want and we'll build them'." The company had even proposed setting up new assembly lines to produce more, he added. Armor Holdings makes 450 such vehicles a month, but the spokesman said they could easily turn out 550. The cost of an extra 100 Humvees a month, it adds, would be $150m (£78m) a year. The Pentagon's budget for fiscal 2005 is $400bn, with $150bn of extra spending for Iraq. But the wider complaint is that the Pentagon has still not fully adjusted to the changed nature of the war in Iraq. Mr Rumsfeld insisted the military was "breaking its neck" to get enough fully armoured vehicles, and that "it's a matter of physics, not money". But critics say the problem runs deeper, the latest manifestation of a mindset that began before the war when the Pentagon's civilian leadership refused to heed military commanders who said "several hundred thousand" troops would be needed. The present US force is 138,000, soon to be 150,000.
What would we ever do without critics to tell us what we should have done?
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
7:23:35 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
LOL! From The Independent... from who or what, they don't specify. Perhaps from common sense or good taste or, and this one rings true, a combination we could call good sense, heh.
The #1 spectator / backseat driver / worthless wanker / onanistic sport on the planet is telling the US what it should do - usually because of its status as "superpower". Of course, if we were so stupid as to listen to any of these feckless fools, we would not be a"super" anything - we'd have squandered our future for a pocketfull of socialist fuckwit programs...
No thanks, world. We'll muddle along with what brought us here: American Good Sense (mostly, heh). Piss off, now, we have things to do.
I hear this from so many in the service- it is the same old tune being played - I think all we can do is supportthose who are defending our country at this time- this is what I call American good sense. Our soldier's are over there fighting w/o proper clothing i.e. sweat socks, hygiene item's. If we can't take care of our soldier's personal needs- do you think the equipment will be appropriate to suit the needs??
The answer is obvious*_LOL.
Andrea Jackson
Posted by: ANdrea ||
12/12/2004 20:54
Comments ||
Top||
#3
hear that a lot from so many in the service, d'ya Andrea? I support your sending hygiene items, very thoughtful
thx
Frank
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 21:44
Comments ||
Top||
Four Israeli soldiers were killed and nine others wounded when Palestinian gunmen set off explosives in a tunnel they burrowed underneath an army post just outside the Gaza Strip border crossing to Egypt, Israeli officials said. ``This was a large-scale attack on an outpost just outside an international crossing that Palestinian civilians use to get into Egypt,'' Capt. Jacob Dallal said. ``It was a very large blast. It leveled the outpost and caused damage in the adjacent army base.'' Dallal said soldiers were wounded in the attack against the small outpost where Palestinian passports were checked before travelers entered the Rafah terminal. Israeli officials said four were killed.
First boom like this since Yasser kicked it. I guess there's too much love in the air for Hamas to stomache...
The attack came as Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon began negotiating with opposition parties to form a new coalition that will allow him to move ahead with a plan to withdraw from Gaza and four Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Sharon threw out his junior coalition partner after they refused to vote for the 2005 budget. The violence also came as Marwan Barghouti, a Fatah leader who is serving time in an Israeli jail for his role in the killing of five people, said he will withdraw from the Jan. 9 election for president of the Palestinian Authority, his campaign manager Ahmed Ghneim said at a press conference. Barghouti said in a statement he will back Mahmoud Abbas, a former prime minister who is the official candidate of Fatah, the biggest Palestinian faction. The Palestinian Islamic militant group Hamas said it was responsible for the attack, as did a group known as the Fatah Hawks, the daily Haaretz said on its Web site.
Entirely too much peace, love, and goodwill in the air for Hamas and the "Fatah Hawks," which is probably the Yasser Martyrs Brigades with a false nose and moustache. Getting a good offensive under way, like the hard boyz in Iraq are trying to do, can lead to no elections. Hamas won't thrive nearly as well under any form of government other than anarchy.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
7:14:50 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[20 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This isn't a big surprise, really. It only reinforces the belief that the Paleos aren't interested in peace with Israel. Even if Mazen were to win, there's nothing to lead anyone to believe that he would actually do something about Paleo-bred terrorism and terrorist groups.
VICTIMS, LAY GROUPS SAY QUIET EFFORTS DO LITTLE TO REASSURE
The Diocese of San Jose has assigned two priests to watch over four colleagues removed from ministry -- and parish residences -- for sexual misconduct. The Oakland diocese just hired a retired probation officer to keep tabs on nine priests, including three who moved out of state.
#2
I've heard the suggestion that the only realistic way the Catholic church can solve both its priest shortage and improve quality control is to import seminary students from the poorest places on Earth. Send them to isolated seminaries on room & board only, with their pay going to their families. Then place them in countries where they *don't* speak the language, where they only give mass, and are under the strict control of a senior priest, who goes between churches to hear confessions and perform more personal services. If they screw up at all, they are out and get sent back to their family. Their passport is kept by their Bishop. After 10 or so years of very faithful service, then teach them the local language and send them to an educational seminary to learn everything else they need to know. On graduation, they become a senior priest with four or five probationaries. It solves several problems: enough priests, well-behaved priests, and taking entire families out of poverty.
At this point our country is facing a period of terror. After the murder of Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam by a radical Muslim, the Netherlands is falling in to a period of hate-crimes. Churches are being burned, bombs are being placed near schools and politicians and opinion makers are being threatened to death. This morning three officers were wounded by a hand grenade during a raid on a home in The Hague in which possible terrorist were hiding. At this point they are still there and are keeping the home occupied. The are probably armed.
After years of preaching of multiculturalism and tolerance by the liberal elites, we are now facing the consequences of not paying attention to the growing influence of the Islam in the Netherlands. I doubt that the situation will ever return to normal. It's reached the point that we fight or we will lose our country. And fight we did. Gusty, Gutsy move.
#1
I hope this has woken up the Dutch. It certainly is a much lower body count in their wakeup lesson than we had in ours in NY and DC and that field in PA.
#2
While Islamists so often abuse the religious tolerance shown them, I wonder if they ever appreciate what happens when open societies get their fill of deception and perfidy.
Don't expect a once open culture to suddenly clamp down on all of its members' freedoms in order to avoid selective enforcement against a dangerous and violent minority. The Dutch aren't going to be hauling in saffron-robed Tibetan lamas because of a crackdown on newly arrived religious types. Call it profiling if you must but Muslim radicals had better understand that their atrocities relfect directly upon the entire Islamic church and it alone.
#3
I hope this has woken up the Dutch. It certainly is a much lower body count in their wakeup lesson than we had in ours in NY and DC and that field in PA.
#4
I hope this has woken up the Dutch. It certainly is a much lower body count in their wakeup lesson than we had in ours in NY and DC and that field in PA.
Dec. 12, 2004 - A Ukrainian presidential candidate's chief of staff believes "Soviet Union sort of KGB experts" were behind a plot to poison his candidate, the aide told ABC News' "Good Morning America" today.
Austrian doctors said Saturday that Viktor Yushchenko, who faces a Dec. 26 runoff in Ukraine against the Kremlin-backed candidate, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, was poisoned with dioxin as he campaigned for president. When asked by ABC News' Bill Weir if the Russian government, and specifically President Vladimir Putin, had anything to do with the poisoning, Yushchenko chief of staff Oleh Rybachuk said: "I am not very positive about government, but what I might say that was Soviet Union sort of KGB experts are clearly involved in this plot."
Rybachuk did not directly implicate Prime Minister Yanukovych in the poisoning, which is believed to have happened at a dinner party in September, but said it was a much broader conspiracy. "I wouldn't call this ordered by the prime minister," said Rybachuk. "Let's say it more broadly. It's the regime."
Rybachuk added that Yushchenko had been forewarned of the plot. "I actually talked to [Yushchenko] in late July when getting messages from both Ukrainian and Russian ex-secret service agents saying there was a plot and poisoning is number one," he said. Rybachuk said the agents told Yushchenko the goal would not be to kill him but to make him an "invalid" in order to knock him out of the campaign. "We couldn't believe they would dare, but they did," said Rybachuk.
They are the KGB, after all.
Yushchenko has called for an investigation into the poisoning plot, but said it should wait until after the Dec. 26 election. Nevertheless, Ukrainian prosecutors today reopened a probe into the allegations of poisoning.
Yushchenko will take a couple of days off before resuming the campaign, said Rybachuk. "The worst is over," said Rybachuk. "He feels great ... [but] he needs rest."
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/12/2004
5:54:38 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This brings up a good question, can you buy Dioxin at Walmart? Or is it just a tad more difficult to acquire? Who has it? Heh.
#2
Rybachuk said the agents told Yushchenko the goal would not be to kill him but to make him an "invalid" in order to knock him out of the campaign.
I was wondering why dioxin was used, since I don't think anyone has ever died of dioxin poisoning. It does cause horrible cloracne and bebilitating pain, so the above expanation makes a lot of sense. They thought the Ukrainians would reject him Yushchenko if he looked like a cross between Quasimodo and the Friday the 13th monster. Dioxin is a powerful carcinogen so Yushchenko will probably have a whole range of cancers starting in the next few years. Maybe Dr. Steve will be kind enough to fill us in on the carcinogenic effects and timelines.
Try Dioxins-R-Us. Dioxin is a waste product from burning, especially plastics, and many manufacturing processes using chlorine (e.g. paper). So no more huffing the burning trash pile.
Posted by: ed ||
12/12/2004 21:12
Comments ||
Top||
#3
Ed - from what I've read recently, all that is true, but the possibilities of cancers may be overblown. The worst that was predicted by "experts" was a lifetime of acne/cyst issues, some pain....IIUC
sounds like they thought his looks was what attracted his support. Very shallow, hmmmm?
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 21:50
Comments ||
Top||
THE Bush administration wants Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer to replace Mohamed ElBaradei as head of the UN nuclear watchdog agency, The Washington Post has reported. Washington believes the International Atomic Energy Agency chief is too soft on Iran's suspected nuclear program, the paper said, and is seeking candidates to replace him.
Its top choice is Mr Downer, but he so far has been unwilling to challenge ElBaradei. The deadline for submitting alternative candidates, December 31, is fast approaching. "Our original strategy was to get Alex Downer to throw his hat in the ring, but we couldn't," a US policy maker told the Post.
"Anyone in politics will tell you that you can't beat somebody with nobody, but we're going to try to disprove that."
Mr Downer recently hosted Mr ElBaradei at a conference on nuclear proliferation in Sydney.
The US wants the IAEA to report Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions over what Washington says is a covert nuclear weapons program. But Mr ElBaradei says the "jury is still out" on whether Tehran's program is peaceful or not. The Egyptian diplomat, 62, also earned the ire of Washington by questioning US intelligence on Iraq.
The Bush administration opposes his winning a third term in 2005 as IAEA chief. The Post also reported that the Bush administration has listened in on phone calls between Mr ElBaradei and Iranian diplomats, seeking ammunition to oust him. "The intercepted calls have not produced any evidence of nefarious conduct by ElBaradei," the Post said, quoting three unnamed US officials who had read the transcripts.
"Some people think he sounds way too soft on the Iranians, but that's about it," one official was quoted as saying.
The official US position is that heads of international organisations should not serve more than two terms, as Mr ElBaradei will have done by next year. Washington has no clear candidate to replace him but is nevertheless "searching for material" to support its argument that he should step down, the Post said. "Anonymous accusations against ElBaradei made by US officials in recent weeks are part of an orchestrated campaign" to oust him, the paper said, quoting "several senior policymakers" who spoke on condition of anonymity.
In Canberra, a spokesman for Mr Downer later said the minister would not comment on the matter.
Posted by: God Save The World ||
12/12/2004
5:16:12 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Oh, Downer's the candidate's _name_. I thought they meant something else.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
12/12/2004 18:33
Comments ||
Top||
Afghan President Hamid Karzai said on Sunday that Osama bin Laden is "definitely" in the region and would eventually be caught, even though American and Pakistani generals insist the trail is cold. "It's very difficult to say where he is hiding. He cannot be away from this region. He's definitely in this region," Karzai told CNN's Weekend Edition. "We will get him sooner or later, trust me on that."
Speculation on bin Laden's whereabouts has long focused on the mountains along the frontier between Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Al Qaeda leader slipped away from Afghan and US forces three years ago. Pakistan's army has mounted a series of bloody offensives against foreign fighters near the border this year, and American forces launched a winter-long operation last week against Taleban rebels on the Afghan side. But there has been no indication that they are close to seizing the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks that prompted US President George W. Bush to launch Operation Enduring Freedom with an assault on Afghanistan.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
5:07:59 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
Saddam Hussein was dead broke, the result of U.N. penalties. Or so it was thought. So where did the Iraqi president find the money to pursue missile technology from North Korea, air defence systems from Belarus and other prohibited military equipment. The CIA's top weapons inspector in Iraq said Saddam carried out much of that trade with proceeds from illegal oil sales to Syria, one of three Iraqi neighbours that bought oil from Baghdad in defiance of the United Nations. Trade with Syria, Jordan and Turkey was the biggest source of illicit funds for Saddam, more so than the much-maligned U.N. oil-for-food program, according to investigations of Saddam's finances. Though considered smuggling, most of the trade took place with the knowledge - and sometimes the tacit consent - of the United States and other nations.
With Republican-led congressional committees investigating allegations of oil-for-food corruption, some Democrats are pressing for answers about why the United States did little to stop the smuggling. The issue is part of a series of broader questions these lawmakers have about what US officials knew about Saddam's overall illicit finances. "I am determined to make some partisan political points see to it that our own government's failures and oversights or mistaken judgments and decisions should also be exposed," said Rep. Tom Lantos, a California Democrat.
Why don't you ask Bill and Al? They were in charge for quite a while ...
Some Republicans are promising to hold hearings on the matter next year. During the dozen years between the two Iraq wars, Saddam's oil sales were supposed to be limited to those under permitted the U.N. oil-for-program. From 1996 to 2003, the $60 billion program allowed Iraq to sell oil and use proceeds to buy food, medicine and other necessities. That program has come under scrutiny because of allegations that Saddam received kickbacks and bribed U.N. and foreign government officials. Besides the congressional inquiries, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has appointed former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker to head an investigation.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
4:33:41 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The trivial smuggling with Jordan, a time-honored tradition, and Syria, their Ba'athist brothers, does not hold a candle to what the UNSCam OFF program amounted to. Compare the quantity of smuggled oil that can be ferried by truck across the desert (without notice) vs. the UN game... There aren't enough tanker trucks in the entire ME, lol - they would have to be bumber to bumper to both borders to compare to the 10-20% margins the OFF game offered on everything imported into Iraq. Oil is a very visible commodity - and the OFF scam was designed to solve that problem. Pfeh. Drop in the bucket, relatively speaking, and Lantos & Co know it. This is just Lantos and Dhimmidonk grandstanding, again.
#2
The trivial smuggling with Jordan, a time-honored tradition, and Syria, their Ba'athist brothers, does not hold a candle to what the UNSCam OFF program amounted to.
The last time I heard the numbers related to Paul Volcker's investigation, they were that the investigaton covers about $21 billion, of which about $15 billion is the value of the Iraqi oil smuggled to neighboring countries and about $5 billion is the value of the oil sold through the Oil-for-Food program.
Keep in mind that the $15 billion relates to a much longer period of time -- the entire period of the UN's economic sanctions. The $5 is limited only to the last four or so years of the UN sanctions, when the OFF program was established.
It was common knowledge that Iraq was smuggling oil to its neighbors despite the UN sanctions. The OFF program was an attempt to re-enforce the UN sanctions by removing the moral argument that the smuggling was justified by the lack of adequate food and medicine in Iraq.
It will probably be a very long time before the UN cooperates again with the USA's desire for economic sanctions on any country. The UN will basically say, go ahead and apply your own sanctions by yourself and with your friends, and leave the UN out of your effort.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 18:51
Comments ||
Top||
#3
And the U.S. will say "go fund yourself" or something very close to that.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/12/2004 19:26
Comments ||
Top||
#4
Funny, that doesn't mesh with what I've read and seen reported since the early 1990's - i.e. value of oil smuggling in the $100M / year range - let's do some rough calculations:
a) Sanctions imposed 1991.
b) Iraq War March 2003
c) Sanction period: 2002 - 1991 = 11 years.
d) $15B / 11 = $1,363,636,363/yr
e) / $25 bbl = 54,545,454 bbls/yr smuggled*
f) x 42 gal/bbl = 2,290,909,091 gals/yr
g) / 365 = 6,276,463 gals/day
h) / 7500 gal tanker volume = 837 tanker loads/day**
i) x approx 18 ft tanker truck length = 15,064 ft
j) / 5280 ft/mile = line of tankers over 2.85 MILES long everyday for 11 years
* generous avg price/bbl of oil during sanctions period
**non-superhighway size I saw in normal use in SA
Nahhh, I don't buy it Mike - I think you have the numbers reversed, or, actually, much worse - Links. I'll buy it if you can prove it - with believable links - no questions asked. Otherwise, this was just a brain fart.
#5
...some Democrats are pressing for answers about why the United States did little to stop the smuggling.
Oh, gee, I don't know...ya suppose something about how the Dems, their media allies, the academic Left, the European Union and Saddam's water-carriers on the Security Council would not have allowed anything substantive to be done about it?
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
12/12/2004 20:17
Comments ||
Top||
#6
I love the way liberals like Mikey try to minimize UNSCAM by saying it wasn't $21 billion, it was only $6 billion. That still makes it a huge scandal. And when are we going to learn how much went into Kofi's pocket? And Kojo, and Jacques, and Sevan's and Pooties's and on and on. It's obvious that these guys and half the State Department have been bought off by Saddam or the MK. Let it all out in public now! Stop the stonewall, Kofi. If Spitzer really wants to be President he should indict Kofi now.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/12/2004 20:28
Comments ||
Top||
#7
Re #4 (.com)
I think a lot of the oil was "smuggled out" through pipelines that were supposed to be shut down.
I heard those numbers on "The News Hour" in a discussion of the controversy. I had also heard them earlier on the "Charlie Rose Show" in an interview with Paul Volcker. On that occasion, though, I was distracted by some family matters and so missed some key details.
If I do see the numbers in a website, I certainly will provide the link.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 21:06
Comments ||
Top||
#8
Re #6 (Mrs. Davis) ... liberals like Mikey ....
My parents are still alive, and they have seven children. Out of the nine people in our family, I voted for Bush and the other eight voted for Kerry, very emphatically. All of them consider me to be a right-winger. Many here consider me to be a left-winger.
I suppose I have been well exposed to a wide range of political opinions.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 21:13
Comments ||
Top||
#9
Re #6 (Mrs. Davis) .... it was only $6 billion. That still makes it a huge scandal. And when are we going to learn how much went into Kofi's pocket? And Kojo, and Jacques, and Sevan's and Pooties's and on and on.
It's a huge scandal, but even the $5 billion related to the OFF Program is not all improperly accounted. Most of the money corresponds to oil that was sold for money that was used to buy food and medicine, as intended. Some percent (yet undetermined) of the $5 billion was diverted corruptly.
By the way, for many decades before the UN became involved in monitoring Iraq's oil trade, much of Iraq's oil earnings were diverted corruptly to Saddam Hussein and to his family and favorites. For all we know, such corruption was worse before the UN became involved than after the UN became involved.
And when are we going to learn how much went into Kofi's pocket?
I recently heard Senator Norman Coleman, the senator who has most prominently demand Kofi Annan's resignation, state in an interview that he has no evidence that Kofi Annan personally profited from the OFF program. (Senator Coleman also said in that interview that he wants to strengthen the UN, which is why he has asked Annan to resign.)
And Kojo, and Jacques, and Sevan's and Pooties's and on and on.
I believed Cotecna's published claim that its employment of Kojo Annan had nothing to do with the UN. I now understand that I was misled about that, and I am sorry if I subsequently misled others. It might still turn out that Kojo played practically no role in Cotecna's acquisition of the OFF contract, but I personally am not going to present Cotecna's or Kojo's arguments in the matter.
I have never had or expressed an opinion about Sevan, etc.
It's obvious that .... half the State Department have been bought off
Iraq is a corrupt society, like most other Third-World societies are corrupt societies. When Iraq sells oil, much of the payment is diverted to the ruling clique. These societies are very backward, but they are very clever about such corruption. Officials in the US State Department are not much of a match for this cleverness and so don't have to be paid off for the corruption to succeed.
Not too long ago, many US businesses participated in such corruption. When US businesses sold weapons systems to Saudi Arabia, Iran (during the Shah's regime), Iraq (during the Iran-Iraq War), and to many, many other such countries, then the US businesses participated in schemes to divert money to elites. It's an old problem, and it's a problem that is not limited to officials in organizations like the State Department or the UN.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 21:42
Comments ||
Top||
#10
IOW, it once again occurred and was likely "known" during the Clinton administration but only was discovered during the Bush 2 admin., ergo its Dubya's and only Dubya's fault!? NO surprise here - the Failed Left and Clintonian Commies, as America's Party of Propriety, is still out to "justisfy" domestic/national Regulation, Governmentism, and Bureacratism.
US President George W. Bush's administration has listened in on phone calls between Mohamed ElBaradei and Iranian diplomats, seeking ammunition to oust ElBaradei as head of the UN nuclear watchdog agency, the Washington Post said on Sunday. "The intercepted calls have not produced any evidence of nefarious conduct by ElBaradei," the Post said, quoting three unnamed US officials who had read the transcripts.
Since this is a rather sensitive item, I'd guess that's why the Post is reporting on it.
"Some people think he sounds way too soft on the Iranians, but that's about it," one official was quoted as saying. The United States wants the UN International Atomic Energy Agency, which ElBaradei heads, to report Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions over what Washington says is a covert nuclear weapons program. But ElBaradei says the "jury is still out" on whether Tehran's program is peaceful or not. The Egyptian diplomat, 62, also earned the ire of Washington by questioning US intelligence on Iraq. The Bush administration opposes his winning a third term in 2005 as IAEA chief. The official US position is that heads of international organizations should not serve more than two terms, as ElBaradei will have done by next year.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
4:28:04 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[15 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I would be spying on him because I don't trust him. I would make it obvious too. Move all the socks out of their drawer and put them in the underware drawer. Make sure a shit load of calls to 900 pr0n places end up on his bill. Send flowers to his wife expressing symathy for he loss. Turn a few snakes loose in his car. Do little stuff like that until he goes stark raving bonkers.
Oh yea no 3rd term. He is as useless as Blix. He has stopped zero non nuclear nations from becoming nuclear and it actually looks like he is helping Iran.
#2
Lol - if only WaPoo knew what Dubya has on them, lol! Wotta buncha twitters for being surprised and wotta buncha Luddites for not realizing they're penetrated (and in all the myriad ways that term can be employed, heh), as well.
WaPoo is still digital cage-liner - and only #2 to the NYT who's prolly jealous they didn't "scoop" 'em on this obvious piece of obvious "skeer" fluff.
The acting president of the Pakistan Peoples Party-Nawaz, Makhdoom Javed Hashmi, could be from prison soon, according to sources. This speculation follows reports that a deal is being negotiated with major political parties currently in the opposition. Party sources said government representatives are engaged in talks over the release with Hashmi's daughter, Maimoona, a member of the National Assembly. They also hinted Hashmi could be free within weeks. An official indication of the possible freeing of the PML-N leader, jailed since November 2003, and found guilty early this year of sedition and inciting mutiny, came in recent remarks by Information Minister Shaikh Rashid Ahmad. He had said that minor mistakes would be forgiven. He was referring to Javed Hashmi.
This'd be Perv mending some fences with the non-MMA parties. It'll be interesting to see what comes of it, if anything. MMA's been courting the PML-N, too...
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
4:22:11 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
About a dozen suspects have been detained after a bomb blast that killed 11 people in Quetta, capital of Pakistan's southwestern Balochistan province, the police said yesterday. The bomb attached to a bicycle exploded on Friday in a busy marketplace in Quetta. It left 21 people injured, several of them with serious wounds. The explosion occurred close to a military vehicle. The victims included a soldier. Two other army men were among the injured. President General Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz reviewed the security situation in the country at a meeting here yesterday and strongly condemned the bombing, an official statement said.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
4:14:41 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[16 views]
Top|| File under:
Cambodian police are investigating a raid on a US-funded women's shelter in which gunmen abducted 93 women and young girls. Police had rescued them from a brothel, officials said yesterday.
And the pimps wanted the back...
Washington has demanded a full investigation into the incident which began on Tuesday when the victims were rescued from a brothel in Phnom Penh, and taken to the shelter. A day later 30 armed gunmen abducted the group in a raid on the shelter, which has closed temporarily after its employees were threatened by the intruders. Police said they did not know who had stormed the shelter and no arrests had been made. "We cannot ignore this and we need further investigation," General Heng Peov, Phnom Penh's police chief, said.
What you need to do is track them down, get the girlies back, and kill the guys who took them. What's complicated about that?
About 50 of the women had earlier shown up at the US embassy in Phnom Penh yesterday to say they were not prostitutes but worked at the hotel as bar or massage girls, Heng Peov said.
I guess there's a diffo in Cambodia...
He said the group, aged 18 to 28, had either returned to work at the hotel or had gone home. "They were not sex workers. They just worked as massage or karaoke girls," said Heng Peov.
Then how'd they get kidnapped?
Embassy officials were unavailable for comment, but in Washington a top US diplomat in charge of combating human trafficking demanded a full investigation. "What the government of Cambodia has to do is arrest the traffickers, free the victims and stand behind the police chief who made the raid," said John Miller of the State Department. Cambodia's Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection Department, headed by General Un Sokunthea, had rescued the women and children and arrested operators of the brothel hotel on December 7, the State Department said in a statement. The statement said eight brothel operators were reportedly released a day later and went back armed to seize the victims from a shelter run by the NGO Agir pour les Femmes En Situation Precaire [Acting for Women in Distressing Situations].
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
4:12:59 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
"It's not everyday that you get to build a campus," says Chadi Chamoun with a wide Cheshire cat grin. A young Lebanese architect who splits his time between Beirut and London (where he's finishing his PhD at the Bartlett School of Architecture), Chamoun speaks in a vintage New York accent betraying the fact he spent a good many years growing up in Queens. He came back to Lebanon to work with his father, Rachid Chamoun, who directs the urban planning program at the Lebanese American University (LAU). On a table in front of Chamoun the Younger are drawings for one of his and his father's most unusual projects to date - a full-scale master plan and design scheme for the new American University of Kuwait (AUK) in Kuwait City.
AUK opened its doors to a modest class of 500 students this fall. Established in 2003 as a private liberal arts university - the first of its kind in Kuwait - the school rests on the site of an old elementary school. "Incidentally, it's all pink," notes Chamoun. Refurbishing the existing structures may be sufficient for now. But eventually, AUK's campus will cover 40,000 square meters in the heart of Kuwait's bustling Salmiya neighborhood. Chamoun's plans include numerous building rehabilitations and the construction of five entirely new structures to house, among other things, a school of arts and sciences, a school of architecture and engineering, a tower for graduate education, an administrative building and a multi-use student union fused with a library and spliced with a food court, bookstore, running track, recreation rooms for student clubs and offices for visiting scholars.
AUK is the latest contender to enter the region's burgeoning ring of American-style institutions of higher learning. It joins the American University of Beirut (founded in 1866), the American University in Cairo (established in 1919), the American University of Sharjah (which opened its doors in 1997) and the American University in Dubai (which held its seventh commencement exercises last spring). Contrary to easy assumptions, none are linked into a satellite system of schools and none save AUS bear any connection to the American University in Washington, DC.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
4:11:08 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[18 views]
Top|| File under:
A FILIPINO expatriate worker was spared beheading in Saudi Arabia after the Philippine government paid "blood money" to waive his death sentence, a Philippine official said today. Saudi judges ordered the release of Primo Gasmen last week after the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs paid $US15,000 ($19,868) to the family of a Nepalese national he stabbed to death in 1998. "We are very happy and relieved that he is being released," said the vice consul of the Philippine embassy in Riyadh, Romulo Israel. "It was a real struggle to free him."
He hoped Gasmen, who converted to Islam during his almost six years in prison, would be freed and repatriated before the end of the year. Saudi Arabia executes convicted murderers, rapists and drug smugglers, most often by public beheading with a sword. At least 52 people were executed last year and 45 in 2002.
Senior Shiite cleric Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah criticized political bickering taking place in the country and called for openness leading towards a future that would unify the Lebanese people and abolish sectarianism. "Lebanon is drowning in political bickering that could drift away from the objective focus in studying things rationally ... and ethically in a way that would not harm the system of values in bickering and confrontation," said Fadlallah during Friday prayers.
Fadlallah was referring to the ongoing row between Justice Minister Adnan Addoum and Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt, which broke out after Addoum said last week he would summon Chouf MP Marwan Hamade for questioning after Hamade said that the security apparatus had concealed evidence about the Oct. 1 assassination attempt on his life. Fadlallah said any criticism should be constructive. He denounced sectarianism, saying it "took people into dark tunnels and handed them over to occupation."
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
4:01:24 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[18 views]
Top|| File under:
Ahmad Al-Jarallah, editor-in-chief of the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassah recently wrote an editorial in support of President Bush's election victory and what it means for the Arab world. The following is the article:
The World Has Changed, But Not the Arabs
"The world and relations between different countries have changed beyond recognition. In some cases even the countries have changed and a new order is controlling the world. What's more the United Nations is no longer able to control the relations between different countries.
If the UN was able to control the relations between countries, I'd consider that to be a bad thing. What the writer actually means is that the UN is no longer able to mediate among countries — or that's what he'd mean if he didn't have the Arab mindset that assumes 'rule', rather than 'govern.'
All this is happening in the outside world while nothing has changed for the Arab World. We are still living in the past steeped in our age old traditions. Our traditions are the source of our concepts, however old. This has always led us to conflicts with the outside world invariably ending in defeat for us. Such defeats in turn draw us back from the path of development. If there is anything which we have to do urgently it is to correct and remedy this situation.
Being backward is not a virtue. But try and convince your fellow Arabs of that...
"We had to give such a lengthy prologue because the U.S. administration - which is responsible for the changes that are sweeping through the world - has started criticizing the Middle East. The United States, which is criticizing the regimes in the region and the living conditions of their people, has succeeded in its efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. This U.S. administration has the strong backing of its people, who recently re-elected President George W. Bush for four more years.
So the Arabs still have two choices: either get on board, or try and wait him out again. Since they've been waiting things out for the past 700 years or so, maybe they should try getting on board for a change, just to see what happens.
We in the Middle East Were Moving Against Development
"Meanwhile, we in the Middle East were moving against the laws of development when the presidential elections in the United States were underway. Our thinking was wrong and we were using our media in the wrong way. We said Bush won't be able to win the elections and claimed Americans won't renew his term in the White House.
Lost that bet, didn't you? Don't feel bad. Jesse Jackson's still refusing to admit he lost...
Our thought process is still being conditioned by our old traditions... Unfortunately, we don't want to admit the truth and accept this fact. We thought President Bush won't win re-election because in our opinion he has led America to another Vietnam-like situation in Iraq. With such an ignorant way of thinking we brought on ourselves new defeats, proving to the whole world we are not from this planet. When Bush won the elections, we retreated to our comfort-zone looking for some new calculations which, we hoped, will be correct and bring back our old glory. We hoped our new calculations would lead the American administration to a bad defeat.
Taking my tongue out of my cheek for a few moments, if the Arab world really wants to regain its 'old glory,' the very best thing for it would be to climb on board the Bush bandwagon wholeheartedly. Arab 'stability' has amounted to stagnation for, lo, these many years. The U.S. is the oldest continuously functioning republic on earth, with the possible exception of Switzerland. Yet it remains vibrant — the world's preeminent superpower. There are reasons for its strength: it's a rich country, full of natural resources, which gives it something to build on. But Brazil's just as rich in natural resources, as is Russia. Much more important than the natural resources is our population. We have a continuous movement of people up and down the social and economic ladders. We take in immigrants as fast as they can show up, and sometimes faster than we can absorb them. The names of our leading lights change from generation to generation: first English and Dutch names, then Frenchies, then Irish, then Jewish, then Italian, now Hispanic and, increasingly, South Asian. Most of our citizenry isn't 'pure-blooded' anything — most of us are Heinz 57, and those of us who aren't are likely to see our children marry outside our ethnic group. Along with the immigrants, we get a continuous flow of new ideas: while the descendents of the old generations go on to study modern dance, womyn's studies, or journalism, the new guys are going into engineering and medicine. Arabia Major doesn't have this welcoming aspect, and in fact has quite the opposite aspect. You can't become a citizen, and if you don't adhere to the local customs and traditions, no matter how loathesome, they'll cut your head off.
The Arab world will actually get a cultural 'bump' from the WoT, especially if they lose — it'll be the best thing that could happen to them. After societies are put to a strain, they're reinvigorated by the influence of their adversaries, by the mother of invention demanding they come up with some serious thinking to preserve themselves. The Germans and the Japanese, their manpower and industry decimated in 1945, got just this kind of 'bump' and used it to good effect. South Korea got the same sort of 'bump' in 1953. They also adapted some of the outside influences to their own culture — Japanese teens are even more giddy than American teens, in the menus in Japanese restaurants feature a lot more than sushi and sashimi. They're ready to grab almost anything foreign, examine it, play with it, and, if they like it, keep it. In that respect they're much like Americans; 'American' food includes not only the New England pot roast of our ancestors, but spaghetti, tacos, sushi, 'wieners,' and corned beef and cabbage. But this is the sort of thing that Arabs find most frightening.
America Will Not Retreat
"We claimed President Bush will never be able to defeat Iraq and said the resistance will kick the U.S. forces out of that country. We described terrorism, which is killing innocent people in Iraq, as ' jihad ' and expected it to win in the end because it is supported by God. To support our calculations, we recalled how the U.S. troops were sent packing from Lebanon in the Eighties because of the resistance in that country. We fondly remembered how the Americans had to retreat from Somalia because of the resistance put up by Somalia warlords. By this way of thinking we forgot the United States has changed and the world has changed with it. The present circumstances in the world are not the same as they were during the days of the Cold War, when the U.S.S.R. was a superpower in its own right.
It was also before Islamism declared war on us. Leaving Lebanon and Somalia left us with nothing but a bad taste in our mouths. Losing the WoT will cost us everything we have.
"All of our thoughts have been answered by the second term of President Bush. The mission in Iraq will continue as in Afghanistan. The American administration has stressed it won't pull out of Iraq, unlike in Somalia and Lebanon, until it achieves its objectives and completes its mission in that country.
In fact, there's every chance we'll end up back in Somalia and Lebanon.
Changing the world, strengthening relations with other countries and bringing democracy and freedom to as many countries as possible is the strategic objective of the current American administration because from the perspective of its internal security, especially the 9/11 attacks in Washington and New York, this is more important for the United States.
I just said that.
The Culture and Way of Thinking of Arabs Became a Source of Danger for the U.S.
"Things were easy for the Americans until bin Laden arrived on the scene and threatened it from inside their homeland. But now everything has changed. The culture and way of thinking of Arabs, and [what is happening] in the Middle East have become a source of danger for the United States. If we fail to understand the changed situation of the U.S. administration, what is happening in Iraq will extend in one way or another to other countries in the region until the desired change is imposed. The second priority for President Bush is maintaining peace in Iraq and holding a free and fair general elections in Iraq.
Which'll give us a secure base for expanding freedom into the rest of the Arab and Muslim world. It's going to come one way or the other, so you'd better figure how to salvage what you want to keep before it does.
"Bush considers the January elections very important. If one hopes the US will withdraw from Iraq in the same way as it did from Lebanon and Somalia, we must say it won't happen. The only thing left for Arab regimes, which are out of tune with the rest of the world, is to understand that standing against the United States is no longer the right way to show their patriotism, especially since they are the real enemies of their people and countries. They must understand the American Administration supports their people, for their freedom and human rights.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
3:26:02 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[25 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Only one thing realy stands in the way, and its the same problem faced by university Marxists-- they have to admit that some, or all their fundamental assumptions were wrong. I will make a prediction that it will take some major internal trauma before this happens.
I submit that the culture of the arabs of the future will have about as much in common with the one present as modern japaneese culture has with Tokugawa Shogunate era japan. I just hope that the transition does not require as much killing.
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/12/2004 16:12
Comments ||
Top||
#2
They must understand the American Administration supports their people, for their freedom and human rights.
I think that they understand it pretty well. They also know that it is not in THEIR best interest. It is exactly what they fear.
Iran has been accused of planning an Al Qaida attack on a major oil facility in Saudi Arabia. Egyptian officials said Iran has helped plan and finance attacks on both Egypt and Saudi Arabia over the last year. They said an Iranian diplomat planned the strike on a petrochemical facility in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia in May 2004. The attack resulted in the killing of five Western engineers. The Iranian diplomat has escaped Egypt but would be tried in absentia. Officials said the diplomat employed an Egyptian national who has been captured and would be charged with espionage and terrorist offenses. Egyptian public prosecutor Maher Abdul Wahed identified the Iranian diplomat as Mohammad Reza Hosseindoust. Abdul Wahed said Hosseindoust paid the Egyptian detainee, identified as Mohammed Eid Mohammed Dabbous, who supplied information that facilitated the attack on Yanbu.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
3:24:43 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[18 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ooooh! This could put the kabosh on that Muslim First bullshit we saw recently with CP Abdullah making nummy-numm sounds with the Mad Mullahs, heh.
#3
I'm sure that the latest outburst of Saudi/Iranian brotherly love™ will be relatively short lived. Could there also be the possibility that depending upon the group, Iran could be speaking with a number of voices?
Posted by: Alaska Paul In Nikolaevsk, Alaska ||
12/12/2004 16:55
Comments ||
Top||
#4
/warms up the mustache curs-o-matic, just in case.
Turkey has been struggling over whether to agree to a troop withdrawal from the breakaway Northern Cyprus as the price for negotiations to enter the European Union. The EU has demanded that Turkey recognize the Republic of Cyprus as a sovereign state even before the European summit on Dec. 17 in the Hague. Recognition of the Greek Cypriot republic would result in a Turkish admission that its troops have been occupying the territory of an EU state. Turkey has deployed more than 30,000 troops in Northern Cyprus, down from 40,000 in 2002. So far, the Turkish General Staff has ruled out a withdrawal without a solution to the conflict on the island. "It is a requirement under the EU's obligations towards Turkey that the EU clearly preserves our membership perspective at the Dec. 17 summit, without creating any doubts," a Dec. 7 statement by Turkish President Ahmet Sezer, Prime Minister Recep Erdogan and Chief of Staff Gen. Hilmi Ozkok said.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
3:23:49 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Go for the perfecta. Do the right thing, remove the troops, I'm sure the central powers will look on this move with great favor. Perhaps there will be a ceremony and a fine sash will be awarded.
The U.S. Defense Department was said to have completed simulated war games to determine the feasibility of destroying Iran's nuclear weapons program. The Atlantic Monthly magazine reported in its latest issue that the Pentagon held simulations of a U.S. military strike on Iranian bases and nuclear facilities. The magazine said the recent war games also included a ground invasion of Iran. The simulation envisioned a three-phase war against the Islamic republic. The first phase was composed of air strikes against bases of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, believed to control Iran's nuclear and missile programs. U.S. intelligence sources were quoted as saying that such a strike would require one day and comprised the easiest part of any military campaign.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
3:14:20 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[16 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Is this the same simulation posted here on RB a few weeks ago in which the reporter claimed the "Blue Ribbon Panel" said such an attack was not feasible?
#2
I thought that the US would attack Iran this past Nov. Now I believe it will happen the first of March. The Iraqi elections will be over,Ramadan will be over,the more Repub Congress will be seated,the nomination fights should be over and in Feb.,Pres.Bush is visiting Europe,meeting individual leaders as well as group meets,giving him chance to sell the coming attack.
Posted by: Stephen ||
12/12/2004 18:28
Comments ||
Top||
#3
Rantbugers, you dont know even half of it.
I do not think we will strike preemptively. The Iranians will give us ample overt cause to launch retailitory and punitive strikes.
These raids would cripple the IRG first, then the Mullah's C3I systems, then destroy any threats in the border regions. The results - and remaining campaign - are left as an exercise to the reader.
I doubt this will be "soon", givne the relative advantages and disadvantages over there. But it will eventually happen. The Mullahs cannot tolerate a successful secular (or even Islamic-leaning) democracy next door in Iraq controlling all the holy Shia sites (which Iranians woudl see the prosperity yearly when they do thier pilgrammages). Because if they do, the Iranian middle and lower classes will eventually revolt and hang the Black Turban fitna-inspiring criminals from the lamp posts by their intestines.
#4
It is important to look at any ground incursion as being just that: no effort to *hold* terrain, just to wipe out their nuclear resources and leave, significantly degrading their military, if it resists, in the process. THE DEBATE will be a comparison with Gulf War I, which left Saddam in power, and whether the US can afford to leave the Mullahs in place. Unfortunately, I do not think that we have the resources to force a regime change.
#5
Too bad is was just similated. Better luck next time.
the Iranian middle and lower classes will eventually revolt and hang the Black Turban fitna-inspiring criminals from the lamp posts by their intestines
Sounds messy. Why expose the good Iranian people to bloodborne diseases and mullah-cooties?
I'll be glad to pay for a good supply of rope. Or piano wire. Their choice.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/12/2004 19:49
Comments ||
Top||
#6
The mullahs would not remain in charge if they and enough of their thugs were dead. Easier to decapitate the government and cut a deal with whomever is left than screw around with the nukes.
But yes, this certainly sounds like a rehash of the Antlantic thing from last month. I guess MENL depends on snail mail.
#7
Why does anyone think attacking the IGRC, known nuke facilities, and regime leadership is enough? The Iranians can close the Persian Gulf at any time. What would be the worldwide effect of sinking a dozen supertankers in the Straits of Hormuz? How many years would it take to clear the blockage?
Posted by: ed ||
12/12/2004 21:23
Comments ||
Top||
#8
Ed - the Iranian strength is not in the gulf, given 20 minutes with the US Navy. The mullahs strength is with the indoctrinated fools who have no formal education, and responsibilities only to enforce th emullah's wishes. I think a cut in the C3 system would make these fools the first casualties in a deserved civil war
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 21:53
Comments ||
Top||
#9
Rantbugers, you dont know even half of it.
I do not think we will strike preemptively. The Iranians will give us ample overt cause to launch retailitory and punitive strikes.
These raids would cripple the IRG first, then the Mullah's C3I systems, then destroy any threats in the border regions. The results - and remaining campaign - are left as an exercise to the reader.
I doubt this will be "soon", givne the relative advantages and disadvantages over there. But it will eventually happen. The Mullahs cannot tolerate a successful secular (or even Islamic-leaning) democracy next door in Iraq controlling all the holy Shia sites (which Iranians woudl see the prosperity yearly when they do thier pilgrammages). Because if they do, the Iranian middle and lower classes will eventually revolt and hang the Black Turban fitna-inspiring criminals from the lamp posts by their intestines.
I do not think we will strike preemptively. The Iranians will give us ample overt cause to launch retailitory and punitive strikes.
These raids would cripple the IRG first, then the Mullah's C3I systems, then destroy any threats in the border regions. The results - and remaining campaign - are left as an exercise to the reader.
I doubt this will be "soon", givne the relative advantages and disadvantages over there. But it will eventually happen. The Mullahs cannot tolerate a successful secular (or even Islamic-leaning) democracy next door in Iraq controlling all the holy Shia sites (which Iranians woudl see the prosperity yearly when they do thier pilgrammages). Because if they do, the Iranian middle and lower classes will eventually revolt and hang the Black Turban fitna-inspiring criminals from the lamp posts by their intestines.
Eight alleged militants have been beaten up by authorities in a Malaysian detention camp for terror suspects, a day after a clash that left 20 people injured, their lawyer charged yesterday. Twelve inmates and eight wardens at the Kamunting detention center in northern Perak state were injured in a scuffle Wednesday after detainees tried to prevent a spot check which turned up a cache of home-made weapons, officials said. The search was conducted in a block occupied by 12 militants allegedly involved with the Al-Qaeda-linked Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terror network. A day after that fracas, lawyer Edmund Bon said a group of 50 officers armed with shields and tear gas stormed another block occupied by 24 alleged JI members — including ex-army officer Yazid Sufaat who has alleged links to the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers who attacked New York and Washington. "At least eight detainees were beaten up. Yazid was handcuffed, spat at and forced to strip. His head and beard were shaved off," Bon said.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
3:12:33 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
OMG! his head and beeard were shaven off. Then his picture was taken with panties on his head. This is an out rage to our Islamic non-arabness we must protest.
Sounds like a new warden. He has decided that inmate made weapons and teh poession of contriband will not be tolerated and searches will commence. He also decided that he not the imates will take control of the prison.
In other words I am playing "tough shitski" on the worlds smallest violin.
Insurgents used the hospital in the volatile city of Ramadi to ambush US soldiers, the military said yesterday, firing rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire at troops. Two Iraqi civilians, including a judge, were killed. Officials for the Ramadi General Hospital and Medical College rejected the claims but said fighting occurred near the hospital Friday night. The ambush happened late Friday as US soldiers attached to the Marines were patrolling in Ramadi, 70 miles west of Baghdad and close to the former insurgent stronghold of Fallujah, said Capt. Bradley Gordon, spokesman for the 1st Marine Division of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force.
Insurgents hid inside the Ramadi General Hospital and Medical College and in nearby areas waiting for the soldiers to move into their ambush zone, Gordon said. "The insurgents turned off all of the lights in and around the hospital as the soldiers approached," he said in a statement. "Insurgents fired rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire from both sides of the road at the soldiers as soon as the lights of the hospital were turned back on.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
3:10:40 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[18 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Take all the patients out of the hospital.
Chain the management of the hospital to their desks and dynamite the place to a pile of rubble.
If anyone thinks this was done without inside help they are on crack. Level it all.
The number of starving in the world has increased by nearly 20 million since the mid 1990s
While hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on weapons, war, killing and destruction and countless more billions are spent on Christmas, the number of people starving in the world is increasing, instead of decreasing. However boring those people are who spread gloom and doom stories at Christmas time trying to make the rest of us feel guilty as we tuck into our stuffed turkeys and push yet another glass of wine into our already bloated bellies, the latest report from the FAO deserves mention this Christmas. "Bloated bellies." Is anyone else's self-loathing meter begining to jump?
"The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2004" is the name of the report released yesterday, December 8th, by the UNO's Food and Agriculture Organization. To ignore this report is a sin. Says who?
While certain nations spend billions, not tens of billions but hundreds of billions of dollars on the destruction of the State of Iraq (and tens of thousands of its citizens, including innocent women and children), the number of starving in the world has increased by nearly 20 million since the mid 1990s, according to the report. "[H]undreds of billions of dollars on the destruction of the State of Iraq ..." Horseshit detectors on overload! Saddam was destroying the state of Iraq and killing its people, not America.
Furthermore, between 2000 and 2002, the number of starving rose to 852 million people, nearly one billion. At the beginning of the third millennium, what are we doing? I'd say that killing off the terrorists who are currently diverting much of our world's wealth towards fighting their psychotic minions is a sterling way of ensuring that we all get back to ending starvation. In the meanwhile, isn't it important to identify the fanatics who prevent such expenditures as the true culprits instead of trying to blame those who are interdicting them?
At this rate, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), which intended to halve the number of starving by 2015, will never be reached and what a pitiful comment on humankind that some of us spend so much on illegal wars, slaughtering children with cluster bombs in a quixotic quest for Weapons of Mass Destruction which continue to go AWOL, while at the same time more and more people find themselves without enough money to put a meal on the table. Funny, no mention of how the Iranian mullahs are so busy crippling Iran's economic future and committing human rights violations by the score. The mullahs (and several thousand Iranians) are about to find out just how "Quixotic" their nuclear weapons quest really is.
This shameful comment on the development of humankind is compounded by the statement from the General Director of the FAO, Hartwig de Haen, who declared that "Enough is known about how to end hunger and now is the time to capture the momentum towards that goal," adding that it is a question of "political will and prioritization." It certainly is. And fighting terrorism rates a lot higher than bailing out corrupt third world dictatorships that are busily starving their populations.
So, we see very clearly the political will and the list of priorities drawn up by the clique of sycophants who backed George Bush's act of butchery in Iraq. First, crawl around the legs of the elitist regime in Washington, hoping for contracts to be doled out, second try to stimulate the arms industry, selling more and more equipment to slaughter fellow human beings and to hell with the rest of humankind. Well, that bit of spewing makes quite clear the author's political agenda.
History always judges in hindsight and en masse and it will be interesting to see how the history book will describe mankind at the beginning of the Third Millennium, when we will be seen as collectively spending more on killing each other and destroying our cities than defending and saving members of our own species in need. Boy howdy, this is sure to keep me awake during the long winter nights.
In the forefront of the fight to set things right is Brazil's President Lula da Silva, who together with the UNO, Chile, France and Spain has formed the Quintet against Hunger, a movement which stimulates partnerships such as self-financing farming schools, which teach farmers how to make the most of their local conditions. Yeah, that'll put an end to world hunger in a hurry.
The United Kingdom has also launched an idea to provide an international fund, based on the sale of government bonds, to provide 50 billion USD per year to address the problems of the world's poorest nations by 2015. Yes, we should feel guilty this year as we carve our stuffed turkeys and stuff them down our gullets because at the beginning of the Third Millennium, mankind was supposed to have risen to a higher and nobler state of development. And a little something known as Islamist terrorism is impeding our attempts at reaching such a goal. Exactly why are we supposed to feel guilty about this?
We all know who we have to blame for this but the history book will blame all of us, not only Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powell, Rice et alia. It is time mankind said a collective NO! to war and destruction of families and homes and YES! to developing the countries which have been held down for so long, by using subsidies and tariffs, while at the same time the "developed" world claims that it practises a policy of free trade. "[T]he countries which have been held down for so long" by their kleptocrats and religious loons, more like.
The fact that hunger and famine is rising, reaching almost a billion, at the beginning of the century, is a telling comment on the deplorable political leadership demonstrated by those who deride the UNO as a League of Nations and then proceed with a shocking act of mass murder, spending hundreds of billions of dollars in the process. The only thing that is shocking is this jerkoff's massively misplaced priorities. It's pathetic to see such idiotic drivel being passed of as journalism. Anyone got some background on this wanker?
Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey
Posted by: Zenster ||
12/12/2004
2:24:56 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Wow. Never heard of him before... Since he thinks Lulu is a peach, the rest fits the mold of Socialist Fool. Hell, he's even got a calendar which sez we're behind schedule on his Global Nobility Progress Chart. Lol! He's just another wanker who'd like to be in charge, methinks. Why, if he were King of the World, there'd be World Hugs and Blue Skies Forever - after he looted the treasuries of those pesky little country-thingys with their trivial local concerns. Think Globally, Act Stupid.
#2
One other glaring conclusion from Transparency International's survey of world corruption is it hurts the poor far more. Combine this with corruption being most serious in Brazil and normally by government employeess, and there is a great deal Lulu can do help the poor in his current position. But of course you are not a real socialist unless you blame the evil capitalists and imperialists for all your problems.
#7
Lets not forget the European buearucrats who threaten to refuse to purchase African crops, thus undermining the economic viability of the state, if the county dared to feed its hungry with 'genetically engineered' American grain. Nothing scientific, just pure self-serving power politics to enhance starvation someplace in the world.
Posted by: Don ||
12/12/2004 10:16
Comments ||
Top||
#8
...Maybe one of our folks with access to more info can confirm this, but I was once told that there has not been a major famine due solely to natural causes in more than a century now - all of them have been due primarily to political or military confict in the affected regions even if weather/crop failure and/or disease was a factor.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
12/12/2004 11:28
Comments ||
Top||
#9
The drought in the Sahel region might qualify, but even that was man made to an extent. I can't think of a single preventable (world wide foot surplus) famine since?
#10
there's a world wide foot surplus? Boy, howdy, I'm musta been asleep...
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 11:44
Comments ||
Top||
#11
First of all, there are worse things than hunger. Ask the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs and the Iranians and the Kuwaitis about Saddam. Thank us for funding his removal.
Second, I'm tired of this "developing countries held down" crap. Some countries have unsustainable populations given their inherently poor agricultural conditions. People in these areas have always starved when the weather turned against them or the locusts came through. If you want to help them, move them out and don't allow them back.
Third, get you f'ing hand off my wallet. I'm sick of being preached to by U.N. commissions, consultants, and lobbyists who eat extradordinarily well while being paid to preach.
Finally (quitting now before I blow a gasket), click on the writer's name at the end of the article and read his bio. I love the part about "providing people with information, to not let them fall into the quagmire of carrot-and-stick control by the invisible barons who control the business and the mass media corporations". This f'ing idiot is working for Pravda for God's sake. LOL
Posted by: Tom ||
12/12/2004 11:59
Comments ||
Top||
#12
While hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on weapons, war, killing and destruction and countless more billions are spent on Christmas, the number of people starving in the world is increasing, instead of decreasing.
Tell them to convert to Christianity then they too can spend 'countless billions' on Christmas.
However boring those people are who spread gloom and doom stories at Christmas time trying to make the rest of us feel guilty as we tuck into our stuffed turkeys and push yet another glass of wine into our already bloated bellies, the latest report from the FAO deserves mention this Christmas.
I promise when I down my next glass of wine I won't feel guity, and thanks for reminding me to order a turkey for Christmas.
"The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2004" is the name of the report released yesterday, December 8th, by the UNO's Food and Agriculture Organization. To ignore this report is a sin.
Somehow I don't think you're going to give us a fire-and-brimestone sermon about the Saving Grace of Jesus Christ... Call it a hunch.
While certain nations spend billions, not tens of billions but hundreds of billions of dollars on the destruction of the State of Iraq (and tens of thousands of its citizens, including innocent women and children), the number of starving in the world has increased by nearly 20 million since the mid 1990s, according to the report.
Notice the pejorative term 'certain nations'. And we did notice that a lot more people are starving then in Clintonesque 90s. Has nothing to do with the Liberation of Iraq.
Furthermore, between 2000 and 2002, the number of starving rose to 852 million people, nearly one billion. At the beginning of the third millennium, what are we doing?
Let me answer this. We were approving the flying of aircraft into buildings and murdering Americans. And s852 billion is not anywhere near 'nearly a billion' and given the way NGOs and the left play with statistics I have serious doubts about the methods used and the numbers you wind up with.
At this rate, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), which intended to halve the number of starving by 2015, will never be reached and what a pitiful comment on humankind that some of us spend so much on illegal wars, slaughtering children with cluster bombs in a quixotic quest for Weapons of Mass Destruction which continue to go AWOL, while at the same time more and more people find themselves without enough money to put a meal on the table.
Check the sked of the UN. The war is legal, and I thought this missive was about food. And that people can't put food on the table certainly isn't the west's fault.
This shameful comment on the development of humankind is compounded by the statement from the General Director of the FAO, Hartwig de Haen, who declared that "Enough is known about how to end hunger and now is the time to capture the momentum towards that goal," adding that it is a question of "political will and prioritization."
Man said a mouthful. Oopsie. Wrong term, eh?
All the world gotta dop is put down that bottle of 90 proof Marxism and start drinking from that nice platic bottle of market based economy and democracy.
So, we see very clearly the political will and the list of priorities drawn up by the clique of sycophants who backed George Bush's act of butchery in Iraq. First, crawl around the legs of the elitist regime in Washington, hoping for contracts to be doled out, second try to stimulate the arms industry, selling more and more equipment to slaughter fellow human beings and to hell with the rest of humankind.
Bush's 'act of butchery' costed fewer lives than even the UN is willing to admit they thought would happen. And you are still failing to tell me how the War in Iraq in 2003 has impacted events in in the 90s.
And actually, if you look, you are reading from Mugabe's playbook.
History always judges in hindsight and en masse and it will be interesting to see how the history book will describe mankind at the beginning of the Third Millennium, when we will be seen as collectively spending more on killing each other and destroying our cities than defending and saving members of our own species in need.
Your grasp of history is as tenuous as your grasp of politics. The USA will survive and history will be far kinder to it than to 'sycophants' such as yourself.
In the forefront of the fight to set things right is Brazil's President Lula da Silva, who together with the UNO, Chile, France and Spain has formed the Quintet against Hunger, a movement which stimulates partnerships such as self-financing farming schools, which teach farmers how to make the most of their local conditions.
We call those county extension offices. Every county in the US has one, by law, and we have had that since the middle 1800s. I can see how that would be an innovation to the likes of Brzil and France.
And I would bet this Quintet holds regular meetings with pate de fois gras and steak. Bitch about how evil the USA is then stick us with the bill.
The United Kingdom has also launched an idea to provide an international fund, based on the sale of government bonds, to provide 50 billion USD per year to address the problems of the world's poorest nations by 2015.
I got a better idea. No free markets and democracy, no food aid in times of crisis.
Yes, we should feel guilty this year as we carve our stuffed turkeys and stuff them down our gullets because at the beginning of the Third Millennium, mankind was supposed to have risen to a higher and nobler state of development.
That phrase, which was supposed to disgust me enough to spring into action, has in fact made me hungry.
We all know who we have to blame for this but the history book will blame all of us, not only Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powell, Rice et alia.
Actually, history will show Bush to be a prince and the rest of his Marxist critics to be gutteral sound producing frog felchers by comparison.
It is time mankind said a collective NO! to war and destruction of families and homes and YES! to developing the countries which have been held down for so long, by using subsidies and tariffs, while at the same time the "developed" world claims that it practises a policy of free trade.
Yes, take it up with the EU and all its subsidies, Make everything free market.
The fact that hunger and famine is rising, reaching almost a billion, at the beginning of the century, is a telling comment on the deplorable political leadership demonstrated by those who deride the UNO as a League of Nations and then proceed with a shocking act of mass murder, spending hundreds of billions of dollars in the process.
#16
Yes Frank, with the pioneering hog farms of the SE have some a huge foot surplus. AB keeps a huge jar of pickled ones in the O club. Pickled pig foots are nourishing, tasty and drive liverals crazy. What more do you want?
#18
F**wit. You want to reduce hunger? Then make GM seeds available across Africa, Asia and Latin America. And eliminate western trade barriers to third world cash crops so that millions of farmers will expand food production in those nations.
#19
Not much left to say after badanov's rant. One of the most profound developments of my lifetime is the world's steadily increasing capacity to feed itself despite an increasing population. The situation is now so good that traditional breadbasket food exporters are no longer needed to fill the gap (where nations cannot feed themselves). I have a better grasp of what is going on than most and even I was surprised when a fews weeks ago, the US dept of Agriculture announced the USA would cease to be a net food exporter next year (2005). Contrary to the author's premise, the world can feed itself, and hunger is almost entirely the result of states inability to address their own internal problems. It should be obvious that further progress on reducing hunger can only be by removing governments.
#20
Perhaps Zhang Fei can give us a figure-- I've heard it's as high as 200 million-- for the number of Chinese lives that were saved by the introduction of high-yielding, hugely efficient ie low-cost GM crops during the 1980s and 1990s.
This report is yet another UN exercise in scoring bureaucratic funding for projects that are flawed by design and whose only practical consequence will be to provide employment to UN hacks and Kojo-style hangers-on for a year or two.
#21
Contrary to the author's premise, the world can feed itself, and hunger is almost entirely the result of states inability to address their own internal problems. It should be obvious that further progress on reducing hunger can only be by removing governments.
This is absolutely correct. The world currently produces enough food to feed itself completely. It is the distribution (read: control) of existing foodstocks that cause famine.
Does anyone remember how Gorbachev's Russia had one of its best ever harvests and still had to import wheat from Canada and America because domestic trainloads of it rotted away on railway sidings while aparatchiks held out for their usual bribes?
#23
Excuse me,but I do not much care for turkey.We will be having ham,glased with pinapple and brown sugar.With chocolate and pumpkin pie for dessert.I would be more than glad to share this fine meal with anyone who is hungry and in need of a meal.Now just who are you going to be giving your food to sir?
The Russian President's adviser, Aslambek Aslakhanov has discussed counter-terrorism issues with U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. "We believe that it is necessary to unite our counter-terrorism efforts," Mr. Aslakhanov told journalists in Washington. According to him, his visits to the United States and Great Britain aimed at persuading western partners of the necessity to work out a legislative basis for joint fight against international terrorism. "Terrorists should know what is in store for them - life imprisonment or a death penalty. We should take active steps against those who have declared war on us," the presidential aide stressed. In his words, the possible extradition of Chechen emissaries Akhmed Zakayev and Ilyas Akhmadov (the latter was given political asylum in the U.S. and the former in the UK) was not on the agenda of his meetings in London and Washington. We did not discuss these issues, Aslambek Aslakhanov said. On his part, a representative of the Russian Federal Security Service who accompanied Mr. Aslakhanov said that Russian and American special services are constantly exchanging anti-terrorist information.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:54:04 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[14 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We should take active steps against those who have declared war on us," the presidential aide stressed.
So, when do they begin taking action against Iran? Fricking wanker!
#2
In his words, the possible extradition of Chechen emissaries Akhmed Zakayev and Ilyas Akhmadov (the latter was given political asylum in the U.S. and the former in the UK) was not on the agenda of his meetings in London and Washington.
What are Chechen emissaries? What is the story regarding asylum of these so-called emissaries?
A local court in Izhevsk (capital of the autonomous republic of Udmurtia bordering with Tatarstan in the south) pressed criminal charges against two members of the Hizb-ut-Tahrir al-Islami (Islamic Liberation Party) extremist organization, reported sources in the Izhevsk Prosecutor's Office. "Judging by the materials received from the organized crime department, a criminal case has been filed under the Article 'Inciting national, racial or religious hatred' of the Russian Criminal Code," the Prosecutor's Office spokeswoman said. She stated that the criminal charges had been pressed against an engineer from Belkamneft and an unemployed person who were members of the Hizb-ut-Tahrir extremist organization banned by the Russian Supreme Court in 2003. "These people distributed the Hizb-ut-Tahrir pamphlets and conducted instigating propaganda," she underlined. Earlier reports announced that 11 people were detained in the Nizhny Novgorod region in connection with involvement in Hizb-ut-Tahrir activities. During the search, operatives found two grenades and many illegal audio, video and printed materials. At the end of June, the media reported about the detention of 10 the Hizb-ut-Tahrir activists in Tyumen and Tobolsk (West Siberia).
This might be the first thing that's actually happened in Udmurtia since they invented the chariot wheel...
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:50:42 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I feel terrible. I looked at the title and was sure the name was an obscure Italian joke. My apologies to the Udmurtians for my insensitivity.
The Tajik Prosecutor General's Office pressed charges against leader of the Democratic Party of Tajikistan (DPT) Makhmadruzi Iskandarov. According to investigation, Mr. Iskandarov embezzled $40 million while being the CEO of Tajikgaz.
That's usually an adequate reason for pressing charges...
Mr. Iskandarov has been also accused of terrorist activities, a murder attempt, illegal possession of arms and illegal employment of 11 bodyguards (five of them were officially registered as Tajikgaz employees).
What a busy lad he's been!
According to Prosecutor General Bobokhonov, the Tajik Prosecutor General's Office issued a warrant for arrest of Mr. Iskandarov on November 26, 2004. After that the name of the DPT leader was put on the interstate search list.
That means he coup the floop?
He was arrested in the northern outskirts of Moscow on Thursday by Russian law enforcement operatives.
"Stick 'em up!"
"I give up, law enforcement operatives!"
Available data indicates that Mr. Iskandarov might belong to an illegal armed band led by the field commander of the former United Tajik opposition Eribek Ibragimov, also known as Sheik. Several years ago, the band operated in the Tadzhikabad district - the native place of Mr. Iskandarov.
It's a very small town. Nobody lives there but him, so who else could it be?
In the end of August, 2004, members of the band assaulted the buildings of the local police headquarters and prosecutor's office. As a result, a police officer was killed and another wounded. On September 2, units of the Tajik Interior Ministry conducted a special operation detaining the Sheik and 20 other members of the band. The operatives also discovered a weapons cache.
"Into the paddy wagon wit' yez! And no lip outta you, Sheikh!"
The cache contained 15 portable anti-tank missile systems, 10 portable anti-aircraft missile systems (Igla), four Kalashnikov machine guns, two submachine guns, 21 anti-tank missiles, 112 air-to-ground rockets, a Grad complex, a BMP gun, and more than 5,000 rounds of various ammunition.
"And what were yez plannin' on doin' with these, Mr. Sheikh?"
"Elk season's coming up..."
During the civil war of 1992-1997, Mr. Iskandarov was one of the influential field commanders of the Islamic opposition. The Sheik was one of his closest aides at the time. Mr. Iskandarov established residence in Moscow in August 2004. In his interviews with the media, in particular, with a newspaper of the Tajik opposition Charogi Ruz published in Moscow, he harshly criticized the policies conducted by current Tajik President Emomali Rakhmonov. The Democratic Party of Tajikistan led by Iskandarov joined the Coalition of Tajik political parties For free and transparent elections organized in April 2004 by Tajik political parties in opposition.
That's what they needed the Grad complex for...
The DPT numbers 4,500 people. It planned to put 22 candidatures on the ballot for the upcoming parliamentary elections. However, one of the DPT leaders stated during a press conference that the arrest of Mr. Iskandarov might hinder the party's participation in the 2005 parliamentary elections in Tajikistan.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:47:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
members of the band assaulted the buildings of the local police headquarters and prosecutor’s office.
We're putting the band back together.
Posted by: Elwood Blues ||
12/12/2004 13:06
Comments ||
Top||
#2
Lemme guess, Elwood...you're on a mission from God.
Ukrainian Prosecutor General Svyatoslav Piskun, who had resumed his post by the decree of Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma on Friday, stated in an interview with Channel 5 that he intended to conduct an investigation of violations during the presidential elections.
Does that include Yushchenko's poisoning?
According to the Prosecutor General, he intends to ask Speaker of Ukrainian Parliament Vladimir Litvinov "a permission to work next Tuesday or Wednesday in parliament as regards accusations of human rights violations during the presidential elections."
"We will gather all statements and notices, analyze them and then take necessary legal measures. In some instances we might open criminal cases, in others we might reject the accusations. Those are normal procedures for the Prosecutor General's office," he said. Moreover, in his opinion, parliament does not have to approve his nomination to the post again because it did it on July 4, 2002 and today the President simply reinstated him at the post. Former Prosecutor General Gennady Vasilyev resigned on December 8, and on Thursday the Pechorsky district court reinstated Mr. Piskun as the Ukrainian Prosecutor General.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:37:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[14 views]
Top|| File under:
A U.S. aircraft has dropped a quarter-tonne (500 lb) bomb on the northern Iraqi city of Mosul after guerrillas attacked a U.S. patrol that was trying to capture an insurgent arms dump, a military spokesman said. The powerful blast on Saturday shook the west of the city. There was an "unknown number of enemy casualties" and eight soldiers were slightly wounded, Lieutenant Colonel Paul Hastings said. Insurgents had set off a car bomb and then opened fire with rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars on the unit that moved on the arms cache. Troops later destroyed the weapons.
Posted by: .com ||
12/12/2004
1:37:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[27 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
??? We have dropped down to 500lb and 250lb bombs from the 2000lb bombs. This says nothing to Daisy Cutters or the MOAB so why is it a "powerful blast"?
The usual suspects with the usual BS face off with Powell... and you know whose fault everything is...
RABAT (Reuters) - U.S. calls for reform in the Middle East have clashed with Arab demands to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict as Washington insisted that economic and political modernisation is needed to fight terrorism.
With unabated violence in U.S.-occupied Iraq, the inaugural "Forum for the Future" in Morocco was viewed by many in the Middle East as U.S. meddling even though American officials insist change must come from within the region.
Outgoing U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said Washington was committed to working actively with Palestinians and Israelis to solve the conflict but that "reform does not have to wait for that".
"We did not overlook some of the challenges that we are all facing in the region and uppermost in that list of challenges is the situation between the Israelis and the Palestinians," he told a news conference on Saturday at the close of the one-day conference.
"But we cannot ignore the fact that reform has to go on ... A child who is in need of an education and will not be a contributing member of society without that education, needs that education now," he said.
The original U.S. initiative to promote democracy across the Arab world was watered down after an outcry from Arab critics. More emphasis was put on economics and less on political reform.
"Now is not the time to argue about the pace of democratic reform or whether economic reform must precede political reform," Powell told delegates from nearly 30 countries.
"All of us confront the daily threat of terrorism. To defeat the murderous extremists in our midst we must work together to address the causes of despair and frustration that extremists exploit for their own ends," he said. Still hoping, after almost 60 years, to keep up the Paleo Gambit and avoid all other issues - particularly those leading toward substantive change. Nothing doing, boys.
Posted by: .com ||
12/12/2004
1:34:47 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[27 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
U.S. calls for reform in the Middle East have clashed with Arab demands to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict as Washington insisted that economic and political modernisation is needed to fight terrorism.
Yep, them nasty ol' Jews are always supposed to be at the root of all the Arabs' problems. It's about time someone bluntly told them to find another scapegoat.
#2
I guess we haven't reached the point of desperation yet. When we do the Arabs are going to find out what kind of "incentives" we can bring to the table.
#3
the Arabs are going to find out what kind of "incentives" we can bring to the table
HV, For starters the 40 mile wide Free Republic of [clanname_puppet] Arabia.
Actualy, we're seeing right now some real desperation, in a tightly controlled manner. They keep hitting all the usual buttons, but it dosen't work the same way, or at all (ie palis). And do you think that the spike in crude prices right before the election was entirely co-incidental? (No, I am not a kook!) But it did not work.
Iran just saw 2 of its neighbhors get blown out in rapid sucession. They have no illusions as to what their fate is, if/when we get around to them.
The magic kingdom is beginning to wonder what the real value of their stock with us is worth.
As for baby asshat assad, well, Meine Meine Tenkel Upharishin.
They have yet to stop confusing gentile words with weakness, but we shall see.
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/12/2004 11:34
Comments ||
Top||
#4
the Arabs are going to find out what kind of "incentives" we can bring to the table
HV, For starters the 40 mile wide Free Republic of [clanname_puppet] Arabia.
Actualy, we're seeing right now some real desperation, in a tightly controlled manner. They keep hitting all the usual buttons, but it dosen't work the same way, or at all (ie palis). And do you think that the spike in crude prices right before the election was entirely co-incidental? (No, I am not a kook!) But it did not work.
Iran just saw 2 of its neighbhors get blown out in rapid sucession. They have no illusions as to what their fate is, if/when we get around to them.
The magic kingdom is beginning to wonder what the real value of their stock with us is worth.
As for baby asshat assad, well, Meine Meine Tenkel Upharishin.
They have yet to stop confusing gentile words with weakness, but we shall see.
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/12/2004 11:34
Comments ||
Top||
Italian politician Rocco Buttiglione, a conservative Catholic and confidant of Pope John Paul II who was recently denied a position in the European Union's Cabinet for having called homosexuality a sin, found a receptive audience in Washington last week. "In Europe, it is fashionable to be anti-Christian," Mr. Buttiglione told the American Enterprise Institute.
Mr. Buttiglione, Italy's minister for relations with the European Union, recently led an unsuccessful effort to have the Continent's new constitution include an acknowledgment that Christianity played a role in the development of Western democracy. "I wanted to add the Christian roots in the constitution in order to make it clear that this Europe is the Europe that has arisen out of Solidarnosc," he said. He was referring to the Vatican-backed trade union Solidarity, which in the early 1980s inspired the collapse of communism in Poland and began a revolution that spread throughout Eastern Europe. "This is the spirit of Europe [that constitution writers] did not want to recognize. They wanted a Europe that goes back to the anti-clericalism of the Third French Republic," Mr. Buttiglione said.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:33:07 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
"In Europe, it is fashionable to be anti-Christian,"
No, in Europe it is still fashionable to be Marxist even with its massive failure laying right in front of it. Marxism is practiced like a religion and like the boys in Islam, is intolerant of competition. Given the opportunity and power, they'd oppress the Christians as much as the Jews have been.
Posted by: Don ||
12/12/2004 9:57
Comments ||
Top||
#4
"I wanted to add the Christian roots in the constitution in order to make it clear that this Europe is the Europe that has arisen out of Solidarnosc,"
If that had been the case he'd have urged for a mention of the Solidarnosc in the preamble rather than for mention of Christian roots.
"They wanted a Europe that goes back to the anti-clericalism of the Third French Republic"
If that had been the case we'd have included "All religions must die" in the preamble.
Buttiglione is a little me-so-very-very-oppressed theocratic jerk. He's just disappointed that the flimsy facade he had tried to erect, pretending to be a fellow indeed personally religious but in favour of secularism, wasn't capable of deceiving the European Parliament.
#6
Which brave little countries are you talking about, Shipman? France? Not so little.
But if your stupid trollish ignorant-beyond-belief clueless self is talking about Greece, I assure you that it being the leader of conservatism in the European Union, it was definitely among the nations that desired to have such a reference to so-called "Christian roots" inserted in the preamble.
Greece, 10 million.
New York City and close-in suburbs (w/in 20 miles of Manhattan), 14 million.
And of course the huge (in population countries):
India was at a billion in 2000 and China was at 1.3 billion - but India's birthrate (1.38%) was higher than China's (0.9%) so they may be on the verge of catching up
Whereas France's birthrate was 0.38%, Germany's was 0.29% and Italy's was 0.09%.
So France, with a population that is less than 1/4 of the US and about 4.5% of China could reasonably be said to be a "small" country. Ditto for natural resources, by the way, if you don't like population as a measure.
Just for comparison .... The US was at 276 million with a birthrate of 0.9%, but our immigration rate is high and those populations will swell the birthrate as well if previous trends hold true over the next decade.
Posted by: too true ||
12/12/2004 17:22
Comments ||
Top||
#9
Ah, more members of the troll-brigade. Whatever, assholes.
Don't you people even *care* about trying to appear sentient? Which at some point means that you'll need to actually think and respond to what a person *says* rather than simply initiate your automatic insult program, to be applied regardless of topic or content of thread?
#10
Last post was in response to Asedwich, not too true.
too true> "France, with a population that is less than 1/4 of the US and about 4.5% of China could reasonably be said to be a "small" country."
Yeah, compared to those countries. Not compared to the rest of the EU member states, where France is second largest (alongside UK and Italy), behind Germany -- and since this thread is a reference to a dispute between EU member states, it wouldn't make much sense for Shipman to be making a comparison between France and China.
#11
Oh, Aris, you're so effective when you stomp your little feet and turn blue in the face! Do it again, do it agin! So cute! I'm about to capitulate!
#12
AK, Pretty much all of the European countries qualify under the "Little, Shitty" program with Greece being among the leader in both qualifications.
#13
Brett> AK, Pretty much all of the European countries qualify under the "Little, Shitty" program
I know -- that's the kind of everlasting American gratitude of the "we will remember and honour and never forget your support" I had been talking about that the Eastern European so-called "New Europe" nations will receive for their assistance in Iraq.
A poem from me to you:
"Memories are truly short /
when comes the time to insult."
#14
Sniff, sniff. AK, you are soooooo sensitive. Those terrible Amis are so cruel!
AK, ever heard of a man named James Van Fleet? You might not be aware, but he could be considered the father of modern greece. Check it out, dude! (i.e. google his name and 'greece')
#15
When y'all get out of Kindergarten, let me know. You think it's about "sensitivity", Brett? It's not -- if I were so easily hurt, I'd have died long time ago.
It's about *contempt*, instead. Time and again people of this forum seems to like finding ways to increase my contempt towards them by constantly representing themselves as even stupider and less worthy of discussion than I'd already considered them.
Oh, American assistance towards Greece in WW2 and shortly thereafter! Wow, I've *never* heard that one before in this forum-- nor have I ever seen efforts by idiots to think that it makes them less personally contemptible when they attempt to distract from their own *personal* ugliness and stupidity of mind by mentioning good actions of worthy compatriots in decades past.
The death of Yasser Arafat and the emergence of Egypt as a peace broker between Israel and the Palestinians has prompted Syria to drop its longtime antagonism toward Mr. Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization. The shift was on display last week when Syria welcomed PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and the first official Palestinian delegation to visit Syria since 1996. They met President Bashar Assad, Prime Minister Naji Otri and leaders of Palestinian militant groups based in Damascus. "Syria fears that they will be alone while the Egyptians lead the Palestinians to peace and a homeland," said Palestinian columnist and activist Gaby el-Jammal. "This is why they are desperate to embrace the new PLO leadership and to enter into talks with the Israelis as well," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:30:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[15 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Syria fears that they will be alone while the Egyptians lead the Palestinians to peace and a homeland,"
Bernard Kerik told President Bush yesterday he was sorry, saying the questionable tax filings and nanny that prompted him to withdraw as the nominee to head the Department of Homeland Security were "my mistake," not the White House's. Mr. Bush has yet to name another nominee to replace outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, although numerous candidates were mentioned in congressional circles and news reports yesterday. A White House spokeswoman said the administration "certainly will work to name somebody as quickly as possible."
Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican and chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, said two "terrific choices" would be Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut Democrat, or Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:28:31 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[21 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Neither Asa (RINO) nor Lieberman (Democrat/RINO facsimile) would be suitable. I want someone would protect our nation without genuflecting at the altar of big business or La Raza. Offer the job to Representative Tom Tancredo or ex-Solicitor General Ted Olsen. Forget about the 2 spineless guys who use pugnacious words but who would lie like a rug after the first angry call from the jerks at the ACLU.
#2
I didn't think Kerik was the greatest thing since titties and beer. I am very suspicous of ex NYPD or any north eastern law enforcement type. I have one reason, gun control. When was the last time you saw a NYPD type that stood for the second amendement? What about any north eastern law enforcement type? I don't trust them with the second or the fourth. Liberman is a gun banner too.
Yes it is that important an issue to me. No gun banners or persons with soft or weak interpretations of the second amandment need apply.
#3
I told y'all this thing was fishy from the start. Kerik was a bizarre choice. There's some kind of political two-step taking place here between the Bush admin and Giuliani.
THe appropriate choice for DHS is a ruthless, hardened inside the beltway operator at the end of a long career spanning positions on the Hill and in the Executive Branch and security agencies. Cheney would be ideal.
Al Qaeda militants in Saudi Arabia have been weakened by a government crackdown but remain determined to attack US targets whatever the cost, US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said. "We are aware that our enemy is determined to attack us and they do not care about their lives but want to inflict the most damage on others...They are bloodthirsty," Armitage told Arabic satellite television Al Arabiya in comments aired on Saturday.
Al Qaeda gunmen stormed the US consulate in Jeddah on Monday, killing five people and briefly taking hostages before Saudi security forces retook the complex and killed four of the five militants. Saudi officials say they have broken the back of a deadly 19-month Al Qaeda campaign against foreigners and government targets in the world's biggest oil exporter. Armitage praised Saudi Arabia's response but said it must remain vigilant. "I think (Al Qaeda) are becoming weaker but are still active and our friends the Saudis are aware of that and so are we," said Armitage, whose comments were dubbed from English into Arabic. "We have to be more cautious at all times and we cannot let up for a single moment."
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:26:09 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[15 views]
Top|| File under:
President General Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz on Saturday reiterated their resolve to bring Balochistan and other underdeveloped areas at par with the rest of the country. Both leaders strongly condemned the bomb blast in Quetta on Friday, saying that such cowardly acts would not deter the government's efforts for progress and development. "They stressed that the government would not be directed by such heinous acts, which are aimed at disturbing peace and harmony," a press release issued after a meeting between the president and the prime minister said. They directed the authorities concerned to step up their efforts to arrest the perpetrators of the blast and to ensure that they are punished.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
12:58:58 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
disturbing peace and harmony
I find that term kinda funny, coming out of Pakland and Balochistan.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/12/2004 3:35
Comments ||
Top||
#2
reiterated their resolve to bring Balochistan and other underdeveloped areas at par with the rest of the country.
There's all the motivation anyone could ask for.
#3
Now hold on, pilgrim, this won't be the first time the ChicTrib has spun a story. Let's at least let all the facts get aired out before a writing assault.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/12/2004 15:09
Comments ||
Top||
#4
Story is WAY too long for posting. You might want to register.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004 17:47
Comments ||
Top||
#5
This is a non-story. Google the names. These people apparently did not exist as news stories, press releases, or any sort of ongoing history, until today. Now I'm seeing the original Tribune story threading to TheAge.au, and San Diego times, but there is nothing older than that.
23 soldiers in the brig, at THE END of a courts martial process? It's ALREADY FINISHED! What's the likelihood that something this size could make it through without one word getting out until now?
#6
Oops. Sorry. Here's another link to an abbreviated version of the orignal.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20041212-1254-soldiers-scrounging.html
#7
OK, here's the only thing I found---From November 1, 2004.
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/westmoreland/s_267992.html
Seems Birt pled guilty on advice of counsel.
"In all, according to a criminal charge sheet, Birt and the others stole two tractors, two trailers, a five-ton truck and a parts van. The soldiers kept some of the vehicles for nearly a year, despite repeated admonitions from a "nervous" Kaus to "get rid of these vehicles/equipment."
Most of the vehicles eventually were abandoned at military bases in Iraq and Kuwait. On some, bumper numbers used to identify the units owning the vehicles had been sanded off and repainted.
The frame of another -- stripped bare for its parts -- was buried.
Birt doesn't deny any wrongdoing.
"I did what they said," he said. "I'm not denying that. "But it wasn't for me to have my own truck. It was not for personal gain. ""
#8
Six reservists, including two veteran officers who had received Bronze Stars, were court-martialed for what soldiers have been doing as long as there have been wars--scrounging to get what their outfit needed to do its job in Iraq.
Darrell Birt, one of those court-martialed for theft, destruction of Army property and conspiracy to cover up the crimes, had been decorated for his "initiative and courage" for leading his unit's delivery of fuel over the perilous roads of Iraq in the war's first months.
Now, Birt, 45, who was a chief warrant officer with 656th Transportation Company, based in Springfield, Ohio, and his commanding officer find themselves felons, dishonorably discharged and stripped of all military benefits.
The 656th played a crucial role in maintaining the gasoline supply that fueled everything from Black Hawk helicopters to Bradley Fighting Vehicles between Balad Airfield and Tikrit. The reservists in the company proudly boast that their fuel was in the vehicles driven by the 4th Infantry Division soldiers who found Saddam Hussein hiding in a hole last year.
But when Birt's unit was ordered to head into Iraq in the heat of battle in April 2003 from its base in Kuwait, Birt said the company didn't have enough vehicles to haul the equipment it would need to do the job.
So, Birt explained, he and other reservists grabbed two tractors and two trailers left in Kuwait by other U.S. units that had already moved into Iraq.
Several weeks later, Birt and other reservists scrounged a third vehicle, an abandoned 5-ton cargo truck, and stripped it for parts they needed for repair of their trucks.
"We could have gone with what we had, but we would not have been able to complete our mission," said Birt, who was released from the brig on Oct. 17 and is petitioning for clemency in hope that he can return to the reserves.
"I admit that what we did was technically against the rules, but it wasn't for our own personal gain. It was so we could do our jobs."
The thefts mirror countless stories of shifty appropriation that has been memorialized in books and films as a wartime skill. Birt and other reservists in the unit said that what the prosecutors called theft was simply resourcefulness, a quality they say is abundant among soldiers in Iraq.
While in confinement, Birt had a chat with a military police officer who was puzzled by why Birt was in the brig. The MP, a guard, told Birt that his unit had "acquired" a Humvee in a similar fashion.
Equipment shortages have become a concern, and soldiers are expressing growing frustration about them. On Monday, the military announced it would not court-martial the 23 reservists who balked at transporting fuel in Iraq because their vehicles were in poor condition and lacked armor, and on Wednesday, soldiers complained to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld about the lack of armor for vehicles.
In addition to the six in the 656th who were court-martialed, eight others in the unit were given non-judicial punishment, including fines, pay reduction and loss in rank.
The commanding officer of the company, Maj. Cathy Kaus, 46, was sentenced to 6 months in jail and fined $5,000 for her part in the thefts. She is scheduled to be released from the Naval Consolidated Brig Miramar in San Diego on Christmas Day after serving most of her sentence.
Kaus and Birt chose to be tried by a military judge rather than a panel that would have included fellow soldiers, and they waived the formal investigation.
An Army spokeswoman said Friday that the Army does not comment on specific cases. But she noted that the military's judicial process allows those who are court-martialed to apply for clemency.
The severity of the punishments was surprising to many members of the company, who regularly saw off-the-books trading and thefts of military property in Iraq by troops in other units.
Surprised by severity
Even Lt. Col. Christopher Wicker, the former commanding officer of the battalion overseeing the 656th who ordered the investigation of the thefts, said he was shocked by the hefty penalties.
"Circumstances at [the] time, however, made these acts less serious than if done in a peacetime garrison environment," Wicker said in a letter supporting clemency for Birt. "The sentences . . . are too harsh given the situation during the initial drive north of Baghdad in April 2003, and the limited flow of repair parts that existed April-September 2003."
Theft of military equipment is legendary among American war veterans, and the act has its own lexicon. In past wars some called it "scrounging," while others called it "midnight requisitions" and "liberating supplies," said writer and Vietnam War veteran Robert Vaughan.
Military bureaucracy combined with the reality of warfare has long made "scrounging" a necessity for soldiers trying to get a job done, Vaughan said. Stealing is justified, he said, because everything being taken is U.S. government property and is being used toward the war effort.
He recalled that while his unit was serving in a remote area in Vietnam, headquarters in Saigon repeatedly denied his unit's request for high-power generators because it said there were none in stock. But on previous trips to Saigon, Vaughan had seen dozens of generators stacked in a holding area at headquarters.
Frustrated, he drove to Saigon one afternoon, posed as a captain from another unit and gave a guard a forged requisition to get the generators.
"I was the greatest scrounger in the Vietnam War," said Vaughan, who has a war novel to be published in January in which the protagonist is an expert at stealing equipment for his unit. "If you did something that is not for your own personal gain, your higher-ups tended to protect you from getting into any trouble for it."
The problems for the 656th started days before the company was to move into Iraq. The company had only two cargo trucks to haul six containers filled with tools, spare parts, ammunition, biological-chemical protective wear and other supplies.
Kaus, the commander of the 656th, said that officers with the 544th Maintenance Battalion, whose command her company fell under, informed her the day before their scheduled push into Iraq that they could not provide her company support in moving the company's six containers. She said she discussed the problem with Birt and her other chief warrant officer, and the two told her they could solve it.
Just deal with it
Kaus said in a telephone interview that she told the men "to do what they had to do" to move their supplies, but she did not tell them to steal equipment.
Birt said he inferred that they had her permission to take the vehicles. The other chief warrant officer, Christopher Parriman, was not charged in the thefts and left Iraq because of a medical disability before the investigation began. Parriman declined to comment.
Kaus said Birt and Parriman initially told her they had permission to take the vehicles from another unit. She said she learned in late May or early June of 2003 that the vehicles were stolen, but at that point the trucks had become an integral part of the unit's regular fuel convoys.
"These were vehicles that were not going to be used by the unit that originally owned them, and they had become an important part in allowing us to deliver 40,000 to 50,000 gallons of fuel a day," said Kaus, who was awarded a Bronze Star for effectively leading the unit.
Kaus also said she could not determine which unit the trucks belonged to, so she could not return them. In fact, the vehicles and trailers in question were never reported stolen, according to transcripts of court-martial proceedings.
In a meeting with 656th officers and leaders of other companies under his command in June 2003, Wicker, the 544th Maintenance battalion commander, asked the officers if they had any equipment that did not belong to them. Kaus and the other officers said nothing, Wicker said.
No one mentioned the stolen property, Wicker and others said, until a disgruntled soldier, Sgt. Charles Neely, reported the unit to Wicker as the company was preparing to end its tour and return to Ohio. Neely, who also took part in the theft of one of the trucks, was reduced to private as part of his sentence. Neely lives in Ohio; he declined to comment.
Wicker, who had heard stories from relatives about scrounging in Vietnam, said he was more bothered that the officers did not admit having the equipment when asked and that they dismantled the 5-ton cargo truck. He said he understood the rationale for stealing the equipment, but he did not agree with it.
In the first several months of the Iraq war, the supply line moved at a glacial pace. Obtaining even basic parts to repair vehicles took as long as six weeks, said Robert Chalmers, who had been a sergeant with the 656th. He received a court-martial for stripping the cargo truck for spare parts and disposing of its frame.
Sitting in his kitchen in Greenville, Ohio, Chalmers recalled the rocket attacks, bomb explosions and small-arms fire his company faced on the road between Tikrit and Balad.
He laughed about his eagerness to head to Iraq. Anticipating that his company was going to be called up, he took two weeks off from work as an electrician to get gear ready before the unit's soldiers received official word that they would be going.
Other reservists' penalties
Chalmers said their actions were technically wrong, but he felt the importance of the company's mission justified the thefts. During the company's year in Iraq, members of the 656th drove more than 1.2 million miles and delivered about 33 million gallons of fuel.
Chalmers was reduced to a specialist as part of his sentence. Of the other two reservists who were court-martialed, one received a jail sentence, and the second was punished but not jailed.
The situation has left Chalmers in debt and bitter. His wife, Tina, said she had to borrow against her retirement savings to pay his $20,000 in legal fees.
"We were sent to Iraq without what we needed," said Chalmers, who has spent 15 years on active or reserve duty.. "If they don't make that decision to get the vehicles we needed, we are worse off and can't do our mission. If we don't do our mission, those tanks at the front stand still."
For Birt and Kaus, the court-martial and confinements are a devastating end to long and successful military careers. Both are holding onto a thin thread of hope that they will be granted clemency by Lt. Gen. Thomas Metz, commander of the multinational forces in Iraq, so their benefits will be reinstated and they will have a chance to continue their military careers.
Birt and Kaus were dishonorably discharged, and unless they receive clemency, they lose all military benefits, including the right to have the U.S. flag draped on their coffins.
This month, Birt received a certified letter from the trucking company he worked for as a shop foreman, telling him that it could no longer employ him because of his felony conviction. Kaus said her employer, sporting goods manufacturer Huffy Corp., has informed her that it is unlikely she will be allowed to come back to work because of her conviction.
Kaus said her anger has subsided, and she is trying to move on with her life.
"My family and friends remind me how fortunate we are that everyone of us [in the 656th] made it out of Iraq in one piece," she said.
For Birt, the end to his military career has been jolting.
"I don't have any regrets," Birt said. "I am proud of the work we did serving our country. If I could get back in the reserves, I would go back to Iraq in a second."
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 20:18
Comments ||
Top||
#9
Grrrrrrrr. This is merely another chapter of a great military tradition: Get the Job Done - in spite of Command short-changing you.
AND more REMF second-guesser JAG whoring.
I'm glad this has made the MSM - they only print it because they hope it hurts Bush / Rummy - there is a chance this stupidity and over-aggressiveness by preening posturing self-serving REMF JAG ass-polishers will be overturned.
Rummy - are you listening? Do the right thing and tell everyone who doesn't like it to piss up a rope. Use hand gestures so even the dhimm-witted get it.
#10
I'll be flaming my congress critter Bill Thomas' ass tomorrow AM. This is some military justice types who are out of control apperently. I am thinking they are to ones needing the demotions. If anyone can find out who brought and pushed this it would be grat to see their names published. We should make sure they are black balled in civilian life. They are the ones who are aiding and comforting our foes and hurting us.
These people who are hurting from this are getting fucked over and we need to help them. The stuff they did has been done in every war to date. It's a requirement that is be done. these JAJ types need a good ass beating.
#11
A friend of mine was a Navy aviation crew chief in Vietnam. He needed an auxiliary power unit (APU) so, in the dark of night, "borrowed" one from the Air Force. When he was preparing to cover the bright yellow AF paint with Navy grey, he noticed a bit of grey peeking through a chip. After careful removal, he established that there were seven layers of paint alternating yellow and grey. Since the base layer was grey, he kept it.
#12
Beg to differ, you folks are way over the top on this supposed conspiracy crapola. The scrounging to achieve he mission is a pitch most of those serving time in the brig use as rationale.
Bitch a blue streak if you want, but unless you have the hearing testimonies, you are operating with minimal information furnished by third party journalists.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/12/2004 22:53
Comments ||
Top||
There were 500 complaints [probably many, many more who would have complained but for intimidation]
this year of abuse allegedly committed by clerics, Aamer Liaquat Hussain, a minister in the religious affairs department, said....
That compares with 2,000 last year, [probably the intimidation was more effective this year]
but as yet there have been no successful prosecutions, Mr Hussain told the BBC... Mr Hussain said he had received death threats from clerics, but that he had done his job and his conscience was clear....The allegations involving Pakistan's Sunni majority and Shia minority referred to a tiny proportion of the country's 10,000 or so madrassas, he said [again probably because others are afraid to complain]
Posted by: mhw ||
12/12/2004
12:49:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
A cleric, Maulana Muhammad Shoaib, was released on Saturday from police custody after he assured a judicial magistrate that he would not harm peace in Peshawar. The cleric, who was thrown out of a mosque in the Shoba Bazaar on Monday for being involved in embezzlement, used threatening language on Thursday saying if his position as a prayer leader was not restored he would 'turn Peshawar into Wana'. He was arrested on Friday. "We took Mr Shoaib into preventive custody following his threat to disturb the public order," Abid Ali, the senior superintendent of police (SSP), told Daily Times on Saturday. He said Mr Shoaib was arrested under 107 section which dealt with public order. The SSP said District Nazim Azam Afridi ordered the police to arrest Mr Shoaib after he addressed a news conference at the Peshawar Press Club on Thursday.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:23:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[14 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mr Shoaib was disabused of any thought of "turning Peshawar into Wana" by as demonstration of electric shock therapy to the occupant of the cell abutting to his. He promised to be "moving along real soon now" saying also " I hear the weather in Punjab is rellty good this time of year."
A senior Islamic Hamas leader called Saturday on the Palestinian Authority to rebuild the Palestinian security apparatuses and establish a Palestinian army. Isma'eel Haneya told a group of academics, "In order to achieve a social amicability, all security apparatuses should be rebuilt in a frame of an army and become national security apparatuses." The seminar organized by the Palestinian Foundation for Culture, Science and Development in Gaza was held to discuss the future of the Palestinians' political situation after the death of Yasser Arafat. Ibrahim Abrash, a lecturer at al Azahar University in Gaza, said militarizing the Intifada was a mistake and asked about "the benefits of the armed struggle. We should ask ourselves where are we going to," said Abrash. "Was militarizing the Intifada good or bad, and what were the benefits of the armed." Haneya responded that there is a difference between "those who want to evaluate the Palestinian armed resistance and those who are seeking to undermine it."
Copyright 2004 by United Press International.
Posted by: .com ||
12/12/2004
1:22:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I interpret this to mean that a) they are discussing these matters with words rather than automatic weapons, which I think is a good sign, b) they are/were fed up with Yasser's little head games when he would play all the "security services" against each other, which I think is also a good sign.
BUT. Leopards generally don't change their spots, and AFAIK Hamas et al do not yet "love their children more than they hate the Jews."
#2
The only spot that needs to change is for a few more infrared ones to appear on the foreheads of as many Hamas operatives as possible. The only good jew hater is a dead jew hater.
#4
We are running out of patience for Hamas assholes.
IMHO on the first serious Hamas terror operation,
there will be a wholsale butchering of their military and political leaders.
I must say I will not shed any tears for them once this happens.
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
12/12/2004 8:13
Comments ||
Top||
#5
Palestinian Foundation for Culture, Science and Development in Gaza?
Bwahahahahaha
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 9:26
Comments ||
Top||
#6
Perhaps they could get some assistance from the Europeans in this effort. Possibly the Phrawnch. They know how to surrender with style.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/12/2004 12:40
Comments ||
Top||
NAIROBI — Somalia's parliament passed a no-confidence motion against the country's new prime minister and his cabinet yesterday, sacking a government that was sworn in less than two weeks ago in an attempt to end 13 years of anarchy in the Horn of Africa nation, an official said.
"The sackers who sacked the sacked have now themselves been sacked."
Dalhar Omar, deputy speaker of the 275-member transitional parliament, said 153 members voted against Prime Minister Ali Mohammed Gedi, accusing him of failing to respect power-sharing arrangements reached in complex talks involving warlords and leaders of the main clans.
The arrangements were so complex he couldn't follow them.
Legislators also accused Gedi of violating the constitution by failing to seek a vote of confidence within 30 days after he was appointed to his post by the president, Omar said in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, where the Somali parliament is based because the Somali capital is considered too dangerous. "But it is more than 40 days now and he has not sought a vote of confidence in the government," Omar said. "The parliament has asked the president to nominate a new prime minister, who will appoint a new government."
Somalia's president swore in Gedi's cabinet on December 1. The new government included warlords, clan leaders and technocrats and was expected to establish the first effective central government since 1991.
Hmmm, Dec 1 to today carry the 2 ... timex 14, ... minus 3 toes ... that seems less than 30 days to me. Perhaps they adopted a different calendar.
Somali President Abdulahi Yusuf Ahmed, who himself was elected by the parliament on October 14, had approved the 31-member cabinet.
The Somali presidential spokesman, Yusuf Mohamed Ismail, said Yusuf will reject the surprise vote because it was "flawed." "We cannot endorse the vote of no-confidence because all members of parliament who wanted to debate the motion did not get a chance to speak during the session ... and the vote was done after the parliamentary session was declared officially over," he said. "The vote was also wrong because the president and the prime minister were not given notice in time to appear before the legislature." Talks were underway between the president, cabinet and the secretary of the parliament to resolve the political crisis, he added.ÂÂ
To be followed shortly by full-contact talks.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:16:39 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Once you've come to accept anarchy, well, order's just so boring, heh. And where's the profit?
A lot more than a dummy satellite is riding on the successful first flight of the super-sized Delta 4 Heavy rocket set to blast off today. The future of United States rocketry, and perhaps the nation's plans to send people to the moon and Mars, faces a major turning point when The Boeing Co. lights the three engines on the most powerful rocket launched from Cape Canaveral besides the Saturn 5 and the space shuttle. The thundering roar, which will be heard and felt for dozens of miles, will slowly lift the rocket off Pad 37B on a mission to prove Boeing's concept of strapping three Delta 4 core boosters together to create a launcher capable of delivering more cargo to orbit than NASA's shuttle...
"We redesigned this engine with simplification in mind," said Mike Costas, a program manager for the RS-68 engine for Boeing's Rocketdyne division. "It's very simple to build." Yet, "it's the largest hydrogen-fueled rocket engine in the world," Costas said. What does that mean? Quite simply, more power. Each of the three engines create more than 660,000 pounds of thrust and 17 million horsepower. That's about the equivalent of 850 Boeing 747s. The engines are not exactly fuel-efficient either, consuming a ton of propellant per second or five tanker-trailer loads per minute... Hoping for eventual 150 ton payloads. (Insert 'Monster Island' joke here.)
Today's launch was scrubbed because of a computer glitch, they'll try again tomorrow.
In fact, the D-IV Heavy does outlift the Titan IVB (25K kg payload to LEO vs. 21K) and does so at less than half the launch cost (170M vs. 430M).
Both outdo the Golden Killer-Goose (aka "Shuttle") by a huge margin.
Saturn I-B's LEO payload was around 20K kg and Saturn V's 110K.
It is interesting that this is an all liquid-fuel rocket, like the Saturns and unlike other recent US heavy lift boosters. Some analysts have asserted that reliance on solids is a false economy in a really well run program (something we haven't had for a long time).
With a NERVA-derived nuclear upper stage replacing the RL-10, LEO payload would double at no increase in cost. A bonus would be a wave of potentially suicidal depression among eco-wackies and media disinformationists.
The former head of Britain's armed forces has warned against planned cuts in the standing army, saying they would leave it "dangerously small and over-committed," in comments published on Sunday. Lord Charles Guthrie told The Sunday Telegraph that the British army "has become dangerously small for what it is being asked to do."
"Of course, if you have too small an army you can't react," said Guthrie, a former chief of both the army general staff and the defense staff who holds the title of colonel commandant of the Special Air Service. His comments were published a day ahead of the expected announcement of government restructuring plans for the armed forces.
Why, it's almost by design.
Prime Minister Tony Blair's Labour government has already detailed its plans to reduce troop numbers and merge several regiments, in reforms, which are expected to save 250 million pounds (480 million dollars, 360 million euros) per year, according to The Sunday Telegraph. Guthrie countered that "none of them (in the cabinet) has been in the military and politicans do not understand nowadays that the army is not just another job." A Minister of Defence spokesman quoted by the newspaper said the army would actually have "more boots on the ground" because of efficiency-minded restructuring.
The Euro forces have becoming smaller and more efficient with more boots on the ground for the last couple of decades. That's why you see the Euro armies everywhere there's trouble.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:13:21 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yeah, and they will do their verbal dumps on the US, but will cry and ask for help when they can't get the job done themselves. Hell, just look at Kosovo. They cannot even clean up the mess in their own backyard.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/12/2004 0:30
Comments ||
Top||
#2
Good thing the UK isn't as efficient in streamlining its forces as some of its Euro-peers - or they'd have no army at all.
#5
Hell, just look at Kosovo. They cannot even clean up the mess in their own backyard.
Or don't want to. After all, that would require believing in something ..... not to mention Work and Risk. (apologies to those who are offended by the rough language in that last phrase, I realize that W**k and R**k are strong words, but sometimes profanity is called for ....)
Posted by: too true ||
12/12/2004 6:44
Comments ||
Top||
#6
just when an army is at is lowest ebb, that's when a really big war comes along.
Yeah, strange how it seems to work out that way.
Posted by: too true ||
12/12/2004 6:45
Comments ||
Top||
#9
All this to 'save' 250 million a year. Do you know how much the IT systems are going to cost for our 'much lauded, envy of the (third) world' 'health' service?
Guess.
30 billion pounds.
30,000,000,000 pounds. It's a lot of money. It's a (expletive deleted - I've not been on the wine this evening) waste of money too. The *waste* in the NHS (spit) is unreal.
Here's another one - another much-lauded initiative by the Labour (ie Socialist) government is LearnDirect - it's just about to be closed down and has cost 1 billion pounds over the few years it's been going.
I know a lot of people here think Blair is a good guy 'cos he helped out. That's as maybe (can you *imagine* what help you'd have got if Maggie were still around? - friggin hell, she'd have sent launch codes to the boomers!), but he is still a Socialist that used to be in CND and is happily selling our country out to Brussels.
250 million - it's peanuts, about a tenth the cost of our 'asylum' system.
Bah!
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
12/12/2004 18:08
Comments ||
Top||
#10
At this time of the year, Tony, one must use the full phrase, just for tradition's sake. "Bah, humbug!" with a full Scrooge emphasis, please. Otherwise, fabulous rant: not only did you convey your frustration, but you gave us facts and figures as well. All that's left for us to say is, "Heah, heah," as of course we now do.
#12
We (US Army and Marines) should offer all these soldiers positions, to include citizenship. I think many highly-qualfied Brits soldiers would jump at the opportunity and we would surely benefit.
Palestinian Authority secretary general Tayeb Abdel Rahim said Saturday he was resigning to run the election campaign of PLO leader Mahmud Abbas, standing for the organisation's presidency, officials said. Under Palestinian law, Abdel Rahim cannot keep his official position while being involved in campaigning for the election, scheduled for January 9.
Paleo "law"?
Campaigning begins on December 25. Abdel Rahim's resignation will come into effect 24 hours earlier.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:08:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[15 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Paleo "law"?
see: "oxymoron"
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 9:44
Comments ||
Top||
#2
Ir'a Oxy-Moroon, Frank.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/12/2004 11:42
Comments ||
Top||
Iran's top nuclear negotiator Hassan Rowhani warned on Sunday that the Islamic state would quit key talks with the European Union on its nuclear program if it was clear no progress was being made.
That tells me he thinks he's negotiating from a position of strength...
Iran-EU nuke talks, set to begin in Brussels tomorrow, are aimed at reaching an agreement with Iran's to halt all its uranium enrichment-related activities that have stirred the international community's fears that the Islamic republic was seeking to develop nuclear weapons. The negotiations will focus on the implementation of the Paris Agreement, reached between Tehran and the EU on Nov. 7, in which the European big three promised a wholesale of offers on trade and nuclear technology in return for Iran's promise to fully suspend its uranium enrichment activities. "We will continue the negotiations for as long as they are progressing," Mr. Rowhani told the official news agency IRNA before he leaves for the Brussels where the talks will be held. "If at any point that our negotiations are not progressing, we will stop them. The end of these three months of negotiations will indicate to us which point we have reached," added Mr. Rowhani.
"We've reached an 'agreement.' The next step will be to hold talks on the implementation of the 'agreement.' If in this phase of the talks on the 'agreement' the other side doesn't agree to preface each verb in the document with the word 'not', then we simply won't keep the 'agreement,' even though we've already 'agreed.' Simple, huh?"
On the other hand, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said that working groups including officials from Iran and the EU would be formed by next week and positive steps would be taken to settle the remaining issues after the Brussels meeting. "Iran and the three European countries (Britain, France and Germany) are going to set the framework for Iran's future nuclear activities during the talks in Brussels on Monday," Asefi said. Iran agreed on the suspension on Nov. 22 accordingly, and the International Atomic Energy Agency on Nov. 29 said it won't refer Iran's nuclear case to the UN Security Council and urged Iran and the EU to implement the Paris agreement. The United States claims that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, however, Tehran has repetitively rejected those claims, saying that its nuclear program is only used for peaceful purposes. Mr. Rowhani is to meet the British, French and German foreign ministers on Monday in a steering committee conference on the sidelines of an EU ministerial gathering.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
12:06:32 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[15 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Can we get a suprise meter here? I think mine is broken -- its not registering anything....
#2
Sometimes a tap on the Suprise Meter will move it to its proper position. More rope-a-dope on the EU-3.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/12/2004 15:14
Comments ||
Top||
#3
This is beyond farce. It's obvious now that the whole thing is a sham designed to maintain the illusion that the EU Dwarves are concerned with preventing Iran from going nuclear. In reality, they're on Iran's side. The mutual objective is to contain the US, not Iran.
#4
Paging Mike Sylwester. So, how does this rate in terms of effective progress by Europe in defusing the Iranian situation?
That Iran even presumes to dictate the terms of negotiation sends a resounding message of scorn and disregard for Europe's own demands or threats of economic sanctions.
The mullahs are continuing their development of atomic weapons and Europe deludes itself regarding their ability to halt it. The situation literally demands raising the question of military intervention, yet Europe is content to fiddle while Rome burns.
All that's missing to date are European cries protesting American "unilateralism" when we are finally obliged to intervene and catastrophically disassemble Iran's entire nuclear program.
#6
Again, the US should spell out publicly that any use of nuclear weapons by Iran or "stateless" terrorists against any target in the world except Europe will result in a genocidal US response against NK and Iran.
Using nukes against Europe, however, well, we'll just leave that up to a UN resolution to prevent/retaliate against.
Let the Europeans really put their lives behind these paper aggreements they've been unrolling in the bathroom.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
12/12/2004 16:35
Comments ||
Top||
#7
Zenster, you ignorant slut,
It is not surprising that the nuance of the Iranian position has escaped a provincial like you. Iran is clearly demonstrating the weaknesses of the European position as a negotiating ploy to disguise their own desperate economic weakness. Iran will not be able to survive without the contributions the economic powerhouses of Europe will make to its long awaited recovery, Delaying the Iranian announcement of having produced a nuclear weapon by several months is well worth the economic sacrifice the E3 will make to preserve peace in out time.
I hope your tiny American mind now has a glimmer of the sublimity of the E3 and Iranian negotiating positions. Perhaps in time you will be able to ascend such heights of intellectual accomplishment when purchasing a fine European motor vehicle.
Mikey
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/12/2004 18:08
Comments ||
Top||
#11
I wonder how long we're going to let this pathetic farce play out, and what event will put an end to it-- the nuking of Tel Aviv? San Francisco?
I have zero faith-- absolutely, utterly NONE-- in the efficacy of negotiations with the Iranians. I doubt the threat of economic sanctions will sway them, or the imposition of sanctions, or the threat of military force.
The only thing that will deter them is being dead.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
12/12/2004 18:29
Comments ||
Top||
Former US president Bill Clinton will be at the American University in Dubai (AUD) tomorrow to sign his book My Life and to release its Arabic version. My Life has been hailed as the most encompassing presidential memoir ever written. Its content and style combine to make it fascinating reading.
The wife suffered through My Life; thought it was a crushing bore and needed another editor.
Clinton has visited the university on two occasions previously. He was the guest speaker at AUD's fifth commencement exercise on June 11, 2002, while in September 2003, he addressed 30 AUD students on the topic of "Overcoming Cultural Misperceptions". He also launched The William Jefferson Clinton Scholars programme at the American University in Dubai which offers scholarships to American students to enable them to study at the AUD. The first group of students is set to arrive in January 2005. After leaving the White House, Clinton established the William Jefferson Foundation which aims at strengthening the capacity of the people in the United States and throughout the world to meet the challenges of global inter-dependence, through its work in racial, ethnic and religious reconciliation.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:04:02 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[15 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
my mother in law bought it -- read half the first chapter and gave up --- too boring
Two unidentified persons detonated a bomb at the home of top Nepalese bureaucrat, Chief Secretary Dr. Bimal Prasad Koirala, in the Nepalese capital early Saturday morning, police said. The chief secretary is the most senior government employee. It was the third bomb blast in the Kathmandu Valley in three consecutive days. Although the police suspect Maoist rebels to be the culprits, the Maoists denied responsibility in telephone messages to some media outlets.
"No, you silly English pig-dogs, it was not us!"
According to the police, two unidentified men on a motorcycle hurled the bomb inside Koirala's home. The bomb damaged the main gate of the building and shattered window panes as well as those of nearby houses. Koirala was not present in his residence when the blast occurred. He was reported to be out of country on government business. Though there were several people present in the house, none were injured, police said. Meanwhile, the Maoists exploded a bomb in the house of a citizen in the west Nepal district of Dang on Friday night, the private radio station HBC reported on Saturday. The report said the house was destroyed by the blast. There were no casualties.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:02:02 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[14 views]
Top|| File under:
Kuwait said on Saturday it had put behind it its anger at the Palestinian leadership's perceived backing of the 1990 Iraqi invasion, as it prepared to receive PLO chairman Mahmud Abbas on a landmark visit on Sunday. "We consider the issue of the position of the Palestinian Authority (leadership) towards the Iraqi invasion as over. We welcome the visit of PLO chairman Mahmud Abbas," Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah told reporters.
Damned sight more forgiving than I'd be.
"Why talk about an apology?" Sheikh Sabah said in response to a question on whether Kuwait will still demand an apology.
'cause they helped Saddam rape your country?
"We welcome him and his brothers in the delegation accompanying him," he said.
"Mahmoud, check their luggage and effects. You know what to do."
The state KUNA news agency said Abbas would arrive Sunday on the first visit by a high-ranking Palestinian official to Kuwait since the troops of ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein invaded the emirate 14 years ago. Acting Palestinian Authority chairman Rawhi Fattuh, prime minister Ahmed Qorei and foreign minister Nabil Shaath will be among the Palestinian delegation. Abbas's visit comes just days after a two-day official visit by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to the oil-rich emirate during which he discussed the need to "support the new Palestinian leadership." Relations between Kuwait and the Palestinians have remained frozen since the emirate accused the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat of backing Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. The emirate demanded a public apology from Arafat as a precondition to normalising ties with the Palestinians. An official visit by Abbas to Kuwait in August 2003, when he was the PA's prime minister, was called off due to differences over the proposed apology.
I'd hold out for Yasser's apology. Might take a while.
Abbas however visited Kuwait in May this year in his personal capacity to address a political symposium organized by the Kuwaiti parliament. He was received by a number of senior officials.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:00:12 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[17 views]
Top|| File under:
KUWAIT CITY (AP) - About 100 candidates for Iraq's first popular election in decades traveled to Kuwait on Saturday for a seminar about the democratic process. The men and women were bused from the southern Iraqi city of Basra for the two-day event organized by Denmark's government. Two of the candidates are running for the national assembly, while the rest are candidates for local offices.
The candidates will attend lectures by experts from the United Nations and Denmark about Iraq's election law, the role of political parties, campaigning and how the vote will be conducted. ``The Iraqi people are new to democracy, and they are thirsty for it and for freedom,'' said Sayyed Dagher al-Moussawi, one of two men running for an assembly seat in the group. He said the seminar was important because ``freedom came to Iraq with chaos and not gradually.''
The national assembly created by the Jan. 30 elections will pick a new president and two vice presidents, who will then select a prime minister. Its main task is to draw up a constitution, which - if adopted in a referendum next year - would form the legal basis for another general election to be held by Dec. 15, 2005. Iraqis also will elect local officials Jan. 30.
Geography teacher Khadeeja Mishkel Moussawi, running for a seat on the Basra council, said Iraqis wanted a ``legitimate government.'' ``Children, men and women support the elections,'' said Moussawi, dressed in an Iranian-style black robe and head cover that shielded part of her face. ``The (U.S.-appointed) interim government has become an excuse for saboteurs,'' the 37-year-old candidate said.
The jihadis don't need an excuse. But get your country under control and we'll be happy to pull our troops out via Syria.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
OK, so a new larger center's needed. Do it
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 10:33
Comments ||
Top||
#2
Perhaps we should ask the Chinese for a contribution, since they have been tweaking the Japanese with subs and supporting Kimmie. They need a reminder of why Japan is best left undisturbed.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/12/2004 11:33
Comments ||
Top||
#3
...This one should be a no-brainer on somebody's part, especially after the money that got porked on the spending bills over the last couple weeks. Having said that, somebody really does need to take a long hard look at the future of the Arizona Memorial. The ship itself is starting to deteriorate badly - I was recently talking to a friend of mine stationed at Hickam AFB, and he was telling me that there are very real concerns that the Arizona's hull could be so far gone now that there may be nothing they can do to prevent massive oil leaks from her fuel bunkers. Any work that needs to be done is complicated by the fairly delicate ecology of Pearl Harbor and Arizona's status as a war grave. One way or the other, though, a call is going to have to be made.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
12/12/2004 11:43
Comments ||
Top||
#4
all of the above is true, it just tweaks me that people can complain because of too many visitors paying their respects, causing damage. Fix it, and tell the overwhelmed to find somewhere else to work....possibly tending the non-existent caribou at ANWR
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 11:46
Comments ||
Top||
Contract killers are being offered as little as $50 to target coalition soldiers in Iraq, the commander of Australian forces said in a newspaper interview published Sunday. Air Commodore Greg Evens, who took command of Australia's 350 soldiers in Iraq last month, said Iraqi insurgents were hiring assassins from neighboring Middle Eastern countries with the promise of cash payments for every soldier they killed. ``This is a difficult adversary,'' he told Sydney's The Sunday Telegraph newspaper. ``The insurgency is not a coherent force.''
Downright incoherent at times, they are.
He added, ``We are seeing zealots brought in from outside Iraq and paid $50 for contract killings. These forces are a general threat to the coalition.'' He said his soldiers were preparing for an all-out assault by insurgents before national elections scheduled for Jan. 30.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A bit more from the longer version at News Corp
"He anticipated a "campaign of murder" to begin in Baghdad over the Christmas and New Year period, with trucks and cars packed with deadly explosives the most likely threat to Australian patrols.
"I'm prepared for the strategic surprise," he said. "Almost all the analysis we are getting says the insurgency is likely to put in a big effort (before January 30).
"They will use every odious mechanism available to them, and that means violence."
Australians in Baghdad were exposed to the lethal potential of car bombs six weeks ago, when a convoy of Australian light armoured vehicles was ambushed by a nondescript white sedan packed with 200kg of explosives.
"That was the classic Baghdad car bomb. I would say it was the closest we have come to losing someone," Air Commodore Evans said.
The Australians are universally regarded as the best equipped troops in Iraq and the Australian light armoured vehicle (ASLAV) is considered the safest form of transport.
The Humvee vehicles used by US forces were exposed last week when a junior soldier asked US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld why he was forced to pin scrap metal - which he called "hillbilly armour" - to the panels for extra protection.
Air Commodore Evans said he was relieved his troops were not put at risk by sub-standard equipment.
"There are many soldiers who are out there in quite lightly armoured vehicles. I'm glad my diggers don't have to do that," he said.
While the struggle for peace in Iraq was far from over, Air Commodore Evans said the recent fierce battle in Fallujah saw the insurgents' leadership desert their fighters when US troops moved into the city.
"We are hearing that the key leadership fled and left their subordinates to do the fighting, which is fairly typical I'm afraid," he said."
#3
Article: Air Commodore Evans said he was relieved his troops were not put at risk by sub-standard equipment. "There are many soldiers who are out there in quite lightly armoured vehicles. I'm glad my diggers don't have to do that," he said.
It is just amazing how stupid/malicious journalists are. Australians don't have to go out in humvees because they don't have to go on patrols where they actually go looking for things. And that's what the Australian officer was talking about - that Australians aren't tasked with the same kinds of things that American troops are. And yet the Aussie journo interprets that as saying that American forces have sub-standard equipment. This is why I hate these arrogant bastards.
#7
I recall the going price for a coalition hit was several hundred dollars. Supply and demand or is someone running out of cash?
Posted by: john ||
12/12/2004 6:54
Comments ||
Top||
#8
Re #3 (Zhang Fei): ... And yet the Aussie journo interprets that as saying that American forces have sub-standard equipment. This is why I hate these arrogant bastards.
The journalist is an Austrialian, writing for an Australian publication read mostly by Australian readers.
He writes: "The Australians are universally regarded as the best equipped troops in Iraq and the Australian light armoured vehicle (ASLAV) is considered the safest form of transport."
He writes: "Air Commodore Evans said he was relieved his troops were not put at risk by sub-standard equipment."
Naturally, this kind of reporting is of great interest to his Australian readers. The intention is to reassure Australian readers that Australian troops in Iraq are well equipped and protected.
As context, the journalist mentions the recent, well-known press conference and subsequent controversy in the USA, about whether US vehicles are adequately armored.
Out of this, Zhang Fei, you concoct your attack that journalists are arrogant bastards?
Do you think this journalist was wrong to write at this time an article about whether Australian vehicles in Iraq are adequately armored? The issue is probably of hightened interest in Australia right now, because it's of hightened interest in the USA right now. In this context, do you think the journalist was wrong to mention Rumsfeld's recent press conference in the context of this article?
By the way, I am kind of surprised that you are so upset when you think other people are arrogant. I would think you would be much more understanding of that fault.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 9:23
Comments ||
Top||
#9
oooohhhhh Mikey took a position (kinda)! And a snarky attack! Surprise meter?
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 9:41
Comments ||
Top||
#10
lex, I'm pretty sure that's how indy media works.... :-p
SRINAGAR, India - Indian troops killed three terrorists rebels including a commander of the pro-Pakistan Hizbul Mujahedin group that has launched deadly attacks in Kashmir in the past week, police said Saturday. A senior divisional commander of the dominant Hizbul Mujahedin group was shot dead by Indian troops during an encounter in Dangal Kashtigarh village in southern Doda district, said a police spokesman. "Abdul Hamid headed a list of most wanted terrorists militants in south Kashmir," the spokesman told AFP.
Two other Hizbul Mujahedin terrorists rebels were shot dead overnight in the districts of Baramulla and Anantnag during separate encounters, added the spokesman. The Hizbul Mujahedin has been active in Kashmir since the launch of an anti-India insurgency in 1989. It wants India's only Muslim-majority state to break away and become a part of neighbouring Pakistan. The group claimed responsibility for a roadside mine explosion on Sunday that killed ten Indian security force personnel and a civilian. It also took responsibility for two more attacks this week on counter-insurgency policemen that left six of them dead and five others injured.
Tej Krishan, a Hindu farmer who was being treated for gunshot wounds inflicted by suspected Muslim militants in the southern district of Pulwama died Saturday in hospital, police added.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004
12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[21 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
My favorite version of "Deck the Halls" comes from none other than Walt Kelly's Pogo 'Possum:
Deck us all with Boston Charlie,
Walla Walla, Wash., an' Kalamazoo!
Nora's freezin' on the trolley,
Swaller dollar cauliflower alley-garoo!
Don't we know archaic barrel
Lullaby Lilla Boy, Louisville Lou?
Trolley Molly don't love Harold,
Boola boola Pensacola hullabaloo!
More at link.
#5
Of course, Walt had variations on his variations.
"Tickle, Salty, Boss Anchovy,
Walla walla wash and a Kangaroo..."
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
12/12/2004 12:21
Comments ||
Top||
#6
No catalog of perverted Christmas carols would be complete without Bob Rivers':
Walking Around in Women's Underwear SUNG TO THE TUNE OF "WINTER WONDERLAND"
Lacy things the wife is missin'
Didn't ask for her permission
I'm wearing her clothes
Her silk pantyhose
Walking 'round in women's underwear.
In the store, there's a teddy
With little straps like spaghetti.
It holds me so tight
Like handcuffs at night.
Walking 'round in women's underwear.
In the office there's a guy named Melvin
He pretends that I am Murphy Brown
He'll say, "Are you ready?"
We'll say, "Whoa man!"
Let's wait until the wife is out of town."
Later on, if you wanna
We can dress like Madonna
Put on some eye shade
And join the parade
Walking 'round in women's underwear.
Lacy things, missin'
Didn't ask, permission
I'm wearing her clothes
Her silk pantyhose
Walking 'round in women's underwear.
China has expressed "deep concern" about Japan's defense policy overhaul, reported Xinhua, China's main government-run news agency. "We are deeply concerned with the great changes of Japan's military defense strategy and its possible impact," said Zhang Qiyue, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry. Translation: Shit! Couldn't they have stayed asleep until it was too late?
The Japanese government has approved a new National Defense Program Outline. The outline features more proactive use of force and deeper involvement of the self-defense-oriented troops in international affairs. Doncha love diplo-speak: "more proactive use of force" - heh.
Japan, the outline says, will continue to watch China's moves in military modernization and marine activities. The document describes China has a potential threat. F**kin' Duh.
Zhang said she expressed China's "strong dissatisfaction" to the Japanese government. "This is totally groundless and extremely irresponsible," she said.
Copyright 2004 by United Press International. Heh. The Goldren Dragon is unhappy and sounding a bit pissy. Gooood.
Posted by: .com ||
12/12/2004
1:18:05 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[18 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yeah, this is great. Their belligerent attitude finally got a rise out of someone other than us. They think they can intimidate Taiwan, but the samurai are a different story.
#6
"Deep concern"? I love it. US + Japan + Australia + India. There's a coalition of democracies that we should be transforming into something close to a formal alliance.
PS Sorry, Volodya. Russia's in the doghouse and will be for a while. Perhaps they'll stop screwing with us in Iran. That's the best we can hope for in the near term.
#7
CHINA, Communism, and Radical Islam share one common attribute in that once you submit or convert, you can NEVER leave lest on pain of death, exile, or both, for you as well as your family, clan, and friends - you know, individual- and societal/mass-based freedom, democracy, and utopianism!?
#8
Rest assured that buried somewhere deep in the politburo's archives is an ancient map depicting Japan as a territorial possession of China. If it isn't there right now, don't worry, it will be soon. Japan needs to take a page from Taiwan. So far as China is concerned, an island is an island is an island ...
The Foreign Office has denied local press reports that Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the leader of the opposition in the National Assembly, was mistreated by the French authorities during his visit to France. The reports claimed that Mr Rehman had been mistreated when he went to the French foreign ministry and Pakistan's embassy in Paris had not protested the incident. The Foreign Office statement said Mr Rehman went to France for a one-day private visit on October 20. He visited Paris and left without incident. "The French authorities made no contact with Rehman and he did not contact the Pakistani embassy for any assistance," the press release said.
"Certainly not! As a matter of fact, you can't spell 'hospitality' without...ummm...'France'. Or something."
The question of giving assistance to Mr Rehman did not arise because the French authorities did not make any designation or declaration about him or harass him in any manner, the press release claimed. More than a fortnight after Mr Rehman visited France, a Paris-based Pakistani association informed the Pakistani ambassador that the French authorities had picked up two Pakistanis, Chaudhry Shaheen Akhtar and Ghazanfar Ali Karam, who had hosted and conducted Mr Rehman's visit. The embassy immediately interceded on behalf of the two Pakistanis and contacted the French internal security authorities and the French foreign ministry and secured the release of the two detainees, the press release said.
So it wasn't Fazl who was mistreated, but a couple of his henchmen who were picked up...
The French authorities told the Pakistani embassy that one of the Pakistanis was detained and questioned for taking photographs near a restricted site. The two Pakistanis claimed that during questioning, they were asked about their links with Mr Rehman, whom they [the Frenchies] allegedly called a terrorist. This has not yet been confirmed by the French authorities, said the Foreign Office statement. Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) senators raised the issue during a recent Senate session.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:14:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[16 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They needn't get their turbans in a bunch over it, the French mistreat every visitor who is not a Palestinian terrorist.
#2
Why should he be treated any differently than anyone else.Wait a minute I just took another look at the pic,he's wearing a turban.That explains the complaint,Fazl has a"Devine Right"to be treated special.By the way he is a damn thief,that is my dish towel he's wearing.
OUSTED Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and 11 top leaders of his regime awaiting trial for crimes against humanity have gone on hunger strike in their US detention centre, one of their lawyers said today. "We have reliable information that Saddam Hussein and 11 other prisoners began a hunger strike on Friday to protest ill treatment," the Iraqi lawyer of former deputy prime minister Tareq Aziz said. Saddam was captured a year ago near his home town of Tikrit, north of the Iraqi capital.
Posted by: tipper ||
12/12/2004
11:27:40 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Michael Moore too, it means he has decided to never feel hungry so he eats before.
#5
We are obligated to provide them food, but it's just fine and dandy with me if they refuse to eat it and die.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/12/2004 12:13
Comments ||
Top||
#6
Ill treatment? They don't provide hookers like at Gitmo?
Posted by: Dar ||
12/12/2004 12:23
Comments ||
Top||
#7
The cable's out again?
Posted by: Matt ||
12/12/2004 12:41
Comments ||
Top||
#8
No boiled dinner for you!
Posted by: The Soup Nazi ||
12/12/2004 13:09
Comments ||
Top||
#9
What's the downside to this? :-D
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/12/2004 14:48
Comments ||
Top||
#10
Pinch me, I'm dreaming. Free Iraqi elections coming up in 45 days?! Mass murderer Saddam Hussein in custody of transitional Iraqi government and going on a hunger strike?!
Where the f*** is the MSM's sense of wonder, awe and gratitude for this sea change?
Supporters of closer relations with Beijing won a surprise victory in legislative elections here today, as voters appeared to reject President Chen Shui-bian's increasingly forceful calls in the past two weeks for greater Taiwanese independence from mainland China...
President Chen's last-minute tilt was partly successful: while polls just a few days ago showed the Taiwan Solidarity Union expanding its delegation in the legislature to as many as 20, from 13 in the last election, the final vote on Saturday showed that the party wound up with only 12 seats.
But the Democratic Progressive Party itself fared much worse than expected, picking up only two seats to claim 89. The Nationalist Party gained 11 seats, for a total of 79, while the even more pro-Beijing People First Party lost 12 seats, retaining only 34 seats, and the New Party kept its only seat.
Independents kept all 10 seats they previously had. Typical NYT spin: He didn't win, because he didn't win as much as the polls said he would.
#1
The people of Taiwan want to reunify with mainland China BUT NOT UNDER COMMUNISM. I believe the effort of Chen Bian will not be seriously affected, as many in the DPP's opposition are tired of accom mainland China andor Chinese Communism.
PPP MNAs and MPAs criticised SNF Chairman Mumtaz Bhutto on Saturday for alleging that Asif Ali Zardari was involved in the killing of Murtaza Bhutto. Talking to reporters in Hyderabad on Friday, Mumtaz Bhutto claimed that Asif Zardari was involved in Murtaza Bhutto's killing on September 20, 1996.
In a joint statement, MNAs Fehmida Mirza and Nabil Gabol and MPAs Ayaz Soomro and Rafiq Engineer claimed that Mumtaz Bhutto was trying to get cheap media publicity by blaming Asif Zardari. " The people of Sindh cannot forget Mumtaz Bhutto's role since 1977 to date," they said. They claimed that Mumtaz Bhutto was confused, as he could not stomach Zardari's release on bail after eight years of imprisonment. They claimed that had Mumtaz Bhutto chosen to face jail instead of joining hands with General Ziaul Haq and the army, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto would not have been hanged. They claimed that the people of Sindh could not forget the anti-Bhutto role of Mumtaz Bhutto since General Zia's time to president Farooq Leghari's time. The PPP's MNAs and MPAs claimed that Mumtaz Bhutto's allegation was tantamount to contempt of court. "The inquiry tribunal headed by Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid had absolved Asif Zardari of Murtaza murder case."
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:09:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[15 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Rafiq Engineer?
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 9:55
Comments ||
Top||
Judge Anti Terrorism Court-II Feroz Mehmood Bhatti on Saturday resumed the hearing of case against Dr Akmal Waheed and his younger brother Dr Arshad Waheed on charges of harboring activists of an Al Qaeda linked organization Jundullah. The court ruled out the objection of defence counsel M Ilyas Khan that trial could not go ahead as long as the doctor brothers were continued to be detained under section 11-EEE of the Anti Terrorism Act (ATA).The court, after ruling out the objection of the defence, recorded the statement of prosecution witness Mati-ur-Rehman, the owner of a rent-a-car company, Orient.
The witness in his examination-in-chief stated that he had on May 26, 2004 rented out the car to Shahzad Bajwa and Israr Ahmed (both the police claimed activists of Jundulla) on personal guarantee of Mohammad Afzal Farooqi, reporter of a local daily. The witness deposed that they did not return the car and later he knew that it was found parked in the house of the two doctor brothers. However, during cross-examination by the defence, the witness admitted that in his statement before the police he had stated that he did not remember the date of delivery of the car and further that he did not produce any documents when he was examined by the police.
Both Dr Akmal Waheed and Dr Arshad Waheed were first shown arrested by the police on June 17, on charges of coordinating attacks on rangers patrolling van in April and terrorist attack on former corps commander of Karachi Ahmed Saleem Hayat on June 10. The police dropped these charges against them and they were on July 2 shown arrested in a fresh FIR registered at Gulsha-e-Iqbal police station. The police accused them of harboring activists of Jundullah, providing them medical assistance and facilitating their training in Wana, South Wazirstan. The two brothers moved bail applications before the trial court which was rejected in November. Later they moved the bail please in the Sindh High Court and a division bench comprising Justice Wahid Bux Brohi and Justice Rehmat Hussain Jaferi ordered them to be released on bail on furnishing surety of Rs0.5 million each.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:05:24 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[13 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the witness...rented out the car to (the suspects)on personal guarantee of Mohammad Afzal Farooqi, reporter of a local daily.
Is Farooqi a common Pak name? Perv iced one Amjad Hussain Farooqi in September and he was high on their list of top terrorists...
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 11:08
Comments ||
Top||
#3
Link's up now.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/12/2004 11:43
Comments ||
Top||
#4
didn't miss much, did I? Nice agit-prop Al-Mikey
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 11:50
Comments ||
Top||
#5
Lovely death-pr0n. Mikey, you and your Izzoid butt buddies are deeply disturbed. Ya'll realy should see a shrink about these death fantasies you all are having. they can lead to some bad places if you don't get them under control.
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/12/2004 12:02
Comments ||
Top||
#6
Send us your e-mail address, MS, and we'll send you civilian beheading videos, photos of Saddam's mass graves, photos of gased Kurds, lists of Iraq-Iranian war dead, statistics on the Marsh Arabs, photos of Kuwait under Iraqi occupation, and greetings from former Iraq Olympic team members who were tortured for losing. Or perhaps you'd prefer documents of Oil-for-Food program rip-offs, photos of Saddan's missiles, or articles about imprisoned children of political opponents. Asshat.
I'm leaving now -- my tolerance for asshats seems to be unusually low today.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/12/2004 12:09
Comments ||
Top||
December 11, 2004: South Korea is going on a high tech spending spree, to provide itself with modern military capabilities, and cut its dependence on the United States for support in this area. This means increasing their defense budget an average of eleven percent each year between now and 2008. That adds up to over $92 billion in spending. While much of this goes to maintain the current armed forces, South Korea will also be buying airborne early warning systems aircraft, Patriot anti-missile missiles, Aegis (radar system) equipped destroyers and reconnaissance satellites. Next years defense budget will be $19.5 billion, an increase of 12.6 percent over this years. For decades, South Korea has felt militarily dependant on the United States. For the last two decades, the United States has been trying to convince South Korea that it was able to dispense with that dependency and take care of itself. The South Koreans have finally got the message. Nothing like withdrawing 2 of 3 combat brigades to sharpen the South Korean's focus
Posted by: ed ||
12/12/2004
10:31:59 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
The Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) is holding its third public meeting today (Sunday) at Minar-e-Pakistan to exert pressure on President Pervez Musharraf to shed his military uniform by the end of 2004 in accordance with the 17th Amendment in the Constitution. Acting Lahore Nazim Farooq Amjad Mir told Daily Times on Saturday that the district government had granted MMA permission on 20 terms and conditions. These include maintaining law and order, not damaging public and private property, no display of arms, not creating any hurdle in the smooth flow of traffic, holding the meeting within the premises of Minto Park and ending the meeting by 5pm.
Uhuh. I'm sure they'll comply in all particulars...
The supreme council meeting of the religious alliance will be held at Mansoora in the morning at 10am before the leaders leave for Minto Park to attend the rally. They will discuss further strategies to strike President Musharraf at the meeting. Central leaders of the six MMA component parties, except Maulana Samiul Haq of Jamiat Ulema-e-Paistan-Sami (JUP-S), will attend the public meeting. The JUP-S has not been attending any MMA meeting for a long time because of differences with the Jamat-e-Islami and the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl.
... which I consider a good thing.
It's a mustache thing. We wouldn't understand.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/12/2004
1:01:50 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
A powerful explosion ripped through an outdoor market packed with Christmas shoppers in the southern Philippines on Sunday, killing at least 15 people and injuring 58 others, the military said. A homemade bomb or a grenade concealed in a box went off in the market's meat section in General Santos city. Officials immediately stepped up security, fearing more attacks in the port city 620 miles south of Manila. "This is a terrorist attack by any measure," Sen. Richard Gordon, who heads the Philippine Red Cross, told ABS-CBN television. He criticized the military and police for failing to prevent the attack despite what he said was intelligence information of an imminent terror strike in the city. "I'm getting reports from some of our people there that they knew there was a plan to pull this off but still it happened," Gordon said. "They need to bolster their spying and their surveillance of places that should be under guard." Army Col. Medardo Geslani, who heads a regional anti-terrorism force, said no group claimed responsibility and it was not yet clear if terrorist groups were involved. "It was most possibly caused by an improvised explosive device," Geslani said.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004
10:00:39 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
E-Mail||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Powell was neither conservative nor liberal. He was the ultimate Washington insider in the post-Vietnam era. He parlayed the post-Vietnam military's wish to be viewed as respectable by the politicians and the politicians' wish to be viewed as serious by the military into lofty and unassailable career posts that straddled the two camps.
I don't see any strong beliefs or great ideas or vision to the man beyond a loyal soldier's deep dedication to preserving the reputation and morale of the military. Hugely valuable during the 1980s and early 1990s but not really relevant today. Move along, Colin. Your era has passed. There's a war on now.
#2
If Powell really was so loyal to Bush, why didn't he push the admin's policies agressively in Europe? Why did he travel so little? Why in the past year did he keep winking at the NY Times editors, signalling his disagreements with the Bush admin and furnishing the Times' editors with ammo and encouragement for anti-Bush editorials on Iraq?
#1
This article, demonstrating that at least one liberal (Beinart, TNR's Editor) isn't a moron, is receiving quite a bit of attention, and for good reason: he "gets it", to a large degree. If he's ignored, the intelligent Liberals will be homeless, yet again. It seems the true-believer looneys are attempting (MorOn.org, et al) to lay permanent claim to the Dhimmidonk party - and if that also happens, they are doomed to the fringe, IMHO.
#2
The Dems have a leadership problem, not an ideological or social problem. In many ways, the current national and international situation is tailor-made for a forward-looking, hawkishly-liberal Dem in the JFK-Truman mode.
A coherent message that merges national security and economic security for highly-vulnerable low-to-moderate income US families will bring back the NYFD types, soutehrn baptists, and active-duty military families that with halfway competent and articulate leadership would make up the Dems' natural base.
Two other themes that the Dems should graft onto an overall national security/economic security message are security of our borders, fiscal security (ie low interest rates and a stronger dollar, enabling home ownership for working class Americans) and finally, energy security via a massive increase in construction of nuclear power plants. Pro-American, progressive, pro-workign man.
And on all of these issues, the Dems would be far out front of the reactionary Republicans, who are terrified of cracking down on illegal immigration--for fear of angering the business elites who want cheap labor. Terrified of reducing the deficit-- for fear of angering the economic elitists who want pork and tax breaks for the Repubs' pet industries. Terrified of angering the oil and gas lobby-- who would rather see the nation continue its addiction to the crack that is imported oil.
This is no contest: Economic elitists/the special interests party vs. the party of national security, national independence, national border integrity, national economic security.
#3
Beinart's dead on: the Dems need to purge ASAP the party ranks of the internet idiotarians and bicoastal culture snobs and return their focus on the moderate- and low-income urban catholics and southern/western baptist and hispanic families that are their natural base. And if the battle's to be waged within the churches, then by all means, speak to church congregations. I seriously doubt that this party would not deliver a more compelling message around the gospels and Christ's ministry to the poor than Rove's minions can manage to do.
If this is not possible, then it's time for a third party. Split off the Arnie-Giuliani-McCain RINO wing of the Repub party and add to it any and all Dems who are hawkish, sensitive to religion, and above all focused squarely on the needs and perspectives of active-duty military families, NYFD-type northern blue-collar families, low- and moderate-income southern and western and hispanic famiiles. Biden, Lieberman, Gephardt for starters. Probably Obama as well. Recruit new leaders, especially among ex-military officers and rising hispanic stars.
Call it the NATIONAL party: again, the goal is national security, secure borders, fiscal and economic security and a fix for the health insurance mess that's going to bankrupt our Fortune 100 companies soon and the rest of us in due course.
A hawkish National Party focused on the needs of moderate-income families that can speak credibly to border issues as well as bread-and-butter economic issues and national security would be competitive in every state of the union. Which is fitting for the only party that can truly represent the national interest.
#4
But there is little liberal passion to win the struggle against Al Qaeda--even though totalitarian Islam has killed thousands of Americans and aims to kill millions; and even though, if it gained power, its efforts to force every aspect of life into conformity with a barbaric interpretation of Islam would reign terror upon women, religious minorities, and anyone in the Muslim world with a thirst for modernity or freedom.
And such lack of vision or passion constitutes a solid forfeiture of any right to lead.
At the Democratic convention, Biden said that the "overwhelming obligation of the next president is clear"--to exercise "the full measure of our power" to defeat Islamist totalitarianism.
Spot on.
And, by exploiting public antipathy toward foreign aid and nation-building, the natural building blocks of any liberal anti-totalitarian effort in the Muslim world, Kerry signaled that liberalism's moral energies should be unleashed primarily at home.
Which is why he's currently warming the bench.
But, whenever Kerry flirted with asking Americans to do more to meet America's new threat, he found himself limited by his prior emphasis on doing less. At times, he said his primary focus in Iraq would be bringing American troops home. He called for expanding the military but pledged that none of the new troops would go to Iraq, the new center of the terror war, where he had said American forces were undermanned.
Smells like waffles to me.
Bush has not increased the size of the U.S. military since September 11--despite repeated calls from hawks in his own party--in part because, given his massive tax cuts, he simply cannot afford to. An anti-totalitarian liberalism would attack those tax cuts not merely as unfair and fiscally reckless, but, above all, as long-term threats to America's ability to wage war against fanatical Islam.
Something that should damn Bush every bit as much as his inability to institute an economic boycott of China.
The peoples of the contemporary Muslim world are far more cynical than the peoples of cold war Eastern Europe about U.S. intentions, though they still yearn for the freedoms the United States embodies.
And it is this sort of baseline moral and ethical hypocrisy that a president of any stripe cannot fairly fight. Islamic fundamentalists want life exclusively on their own terms (i.e., Sharia law) with all the freedoms of a secular society. The two are utterly inimicable and yet, in the midst of straining on gnats and swallowing camels whole, Muslims refuse to comprehend the absurdity of this. Complete individual freedom implicitly demands tolerance for all cultures.
If Islam cannot digest this one simple fact it is doomed to history's scrap heap. Similarly, if liberals cannot see that a strong and vital nation must secure its interests through prudently administered military might, they too are nothing more than relics of a long past era of naive flower power.
#5
lex - In many ways, the current national and international situation is tailor-made for a forward-looking, hawkishly-liberal Dem in the JFK-Truman mode.
And GW is? He's certainly not a raving right wing conservative the LLL make him out to be. Senior prescription drug plans, increased funding for education, real diversity among his cabinet. It wasn't Liberal Darling Bill that did that.
The fundamental problem for the Dems, is that pols like GW in the Republican Party have just as much claim to that 'traditional' spectrum of the Dems. Its just as Miller said "I didn't leave the party, the party left me." Once they have left, its unlikely they are going back. What are you going to offer? Rebates? Marked Up Trade-Ins? A Free Coffee Dispenser?
Posted by: Don ||
12/12/2004 10:11
Comments ||
Top||
#6
It could also be said that many Americans want two supplementary political parties. That is, they want a "new" republican party that keeps its expertise in foreign policy, while discarding *any* "moral" (religion-based ethics) issues, from an anti-federalist point of view (that is, not embracing immorality or amorality, like the democrats, but keeping their nose out of States' rights issues.) Conversely, they want a "new" democratic party that at least knows *something* about foreign policy, and returns to a strong base of anti-authoritarianism, discarding the last remnants of socialism and "big government". This "new" democratic party would unavoidably have both internationalist and isolationist factions, yet emphasize its strengths against abusive big business practices. It would also have to try and co-opt the "green" movement away from the Green party. In both cases, the "new" parties should steer towards federal deconstruction, reducing and eliminating broad sectors of the federal government not allowed by law, but currently permitted by statutory neglect.
#7
your invocation of State's rights is fine. The LLL however, uses the "full faith and credit" Article IV to cherry pick wacky courts/legislatures (like say...Massachusetts' Supremes) who'll find ..oh, say....Gay Marriage... legal, and force it upon all the other states. Why do you think all the gay couples travelled to NY, Mass, and San Fran to try and get their union legally blessed? So they could go home and sue to force their local states to recognize it. To believe otherwise is denial
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 10:25
Comments ||
Top||
#8
If Islam cannot digest this one simple fact it is doomed to history's scrap heap.
Islam IS on history's scrapheap.
Similarly, if liberals cannot see that a strong and vital nation must secure its interests through prudently administered military might, they too are nothing more than relics of a long past era of naive flower power.
The left 'see' all that. They don't want to recognize it. They want to destroy the United States. And if they can passively ot actively use the armed enemies of the United States to kill or terrorize Americans then that is less killing they must themselves do to gain power.
#9
Don: W is not an old-fashioned conservative by any means, and certainly his democracy promotion abroad puts him in the best JFK-Truman-Scoop Jackson tradition. No wonder all these former Dems (Perle, Wolfowitz, Chris Hitchens) are part of his team.
But domestically W's not really the "compassionate conservative" he promised us. In the domestic sphere the Repubs' policies are little more than corporate pork, shoveled by the ton: a corrupt and ludicrously slanted energy bill, an FCC that's firmly in the pocket of the Baby Bells, and Orrin Hatch is the reactionary music industry's best friend. I don't see any substantial achievements in the health insurance legislation area from Dr. Frist, either. It's very hard to argue that Bush is a successful president domestically.
Which is why, again, the Republican flank is wide open on the domestic side and why a hawkish, creative, energetic liberal focused on the key attributes of security for moderate-income families and for the nation overall would IMHO win easily in 2008.
#12
As you know, Aris, the "left" do not constitute 50% of the American electorate. Only about 30-35% of registered Democrats are in any real sense "leftists", and registered Dems themselves are slightly less than one-third of the electorate overall. Add to this ~11% of the electorate that's leftist perhaps another 5% of the electorate that is leftist but not registered Dem, and you get ~16%, or 20% absolute maximum, of the electorate in this country that is leftist.
Whether they want to "destroy the US" or not, US leftists clearly believe that anything that hurts the Bush administration will further their bizarre notion os "progress." This includes supporting neck-sawing fascists across the muslim world.
#13
Note also that around 50% of US leftists are concentrated in New York City, Boston, the San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle, Portland, LA and DC, with the remainder clustered in the college towns that have a foreign policy like Ann Arbor, Boulder, Madison, Hyde Park etc.
American leftists are completely insignificant at the national level. Their only discernible impact on legislation or public policy is at the state and local level.
#15
You give new meaning to the term "pedantry." Also to the adjectives "obtuse" and "inane."
The terms Left and Right are western ideological notations that derive from the seating arrangements in the National Assembly during the French Revolution and have nothing whatsoever to do with numerical or statistical apportionments.
Do not hijack this thread. Go piss on someone else's thread.
Once you start defining "Left" or "Right" through anything other than compared to the *center* of a society's ideological positions, (which inevitable puts about 50% of the society to the right of that center, and 50% of that society to the left of that center), you've completely removed all meaning of those words.
How many support the legality abortions in the USA? Is that the only 16% or 20% that you name to be leftist? How many support stricter gun control? Is that only 16% to 20%? How many favour civil unions for gay people?
How many voted for Kerry, lex? Is that only 16% or 20% of the voters?
Go on defining words however you wish them. But left and right are directions, and at each given moment there's about similar levels of population belonging to either the left or the right. If the percentages *weren't* about equal, then society would have already moved to that ideology as its "centrist position", and a new "right" and "left" would have emerged, forming around said centrist position.
All societal change is about moving the center, and then having "left" and "right" to be references to said new center.
#17
Support for abortion rights is not a "leftist" position; it's mainstream and has been for a generation. SCOTUS's Roe v Wade compromise-- call it an abortion if you will, but there it is, and it's stood the test of time-- is strongly favored by reliable majorities of most major demographics in the US: men, women, catholics, married suburban women, married suburban catholics, etc. The Supreme Court will not touch Roe v Wade precisely because support for the R v W compromise is so widespread and dominant in the US. Bush won't touch it either.
There is no widespread support at this point for gay civil unions in this country. Rank and file Democratic voters across the country (with the narrow exceptions of Dems in the SF Bay Area, LA, NYC and Boston) overwhelmingly oppose them.
There is no meaningful "left" in the US, merely two parties that dance around a national consensus favoring more or less limited government, more or less pro-capitalist economic policies, and longstanding national legislative and judicial compromises concerning abortion, civil rights and affirmative action.
#18
The terms 'left' and 'right' have never meant anything outside marxist/socialist circles where they designate believers and non-believers. There are only two political streams that matter. Let's call them the 'fixers' and the 'whiners'. The 'fixers' want to work on solving and improving problems. The 'whiners' want to figure out who to blame.
#19
Re #18 (phil-b): There are only two political streams that matter. Let's call them the 'fixers' and the 'whiners'. The 'fixers' want to work on solving and improving problems. The 'whiners' want to figure out who to blame.
Kofi Annan and the UN are to blame for everything.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 16:13
Comments ||
Top||
#20
Do you believe the UN and Kofi are the best system to fix the worlds ills Mike? Why?
#21
There is no meaningful "left" in the US, merely two parties that dance around a national consensus favoring more or less limited government, more or less pro-capitalist economic policies, and longstanding national legislative and judicial compromises concerning abortion, civil rights and affirmative action.
What you are talking about is that both major parties are centrist. I agree. But one of them is center-*right* and the other is center-*left*.
You are perhaps correct about abortion rights (it would have been a better example to give a few decades ago), but where civil unions for gay people are concerned, sorry but from Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,103756,00.html: "Americans are more supportive on the issue of allowing gay and lesbian couples to form "civil unions that are not marriages." Today, 41 percent support and 48 percent oppose civil unions. "
It's only about the issue of calling said unions "marriage" that's there's still overwhelming opposition to. As one of the current issues, civil unions for gay people is where you can see the lines of left/right being approached. At some point it will tilt one way or another, the issue will no longer be discussed because vast consensus will have been reached, and then we won't be able to use it as an example.
Phil> The terms 'left' and 'right' have never meant anything outside marxist/socialist circles where they designate believers and non-believers
I'd be all in favour of discontinuing the confusing terminology but many more people use the terms than just Marxists or Socialists I'm afraid. As you could see in any day in Rantburg, when the word "right" is used to describe the intelligent Republican voters and the word "leftist" is used to insult everyone who would consider voting for Kerry.
#22
See David Horowitz's article, "Liberals, Leftists, and the War in Iraq" at www.frontpagemag.com, which explains the distinctions quite well. Horowitz describes who he thinks the anti-American American leftists are.
#23
Once you start defining "Left" or "Right" through anything other than compared to the *center* of a society's ideological positions, (which inevitable puts about 50% of the society to the right of that center, and 50% of that society to the left of that center), you've completely removed all meaning of those words.
One thing that differentiates the US political scene from Europe's is the presence of a large center of moderates. Your formulation, Aris, ignores that reality.
Not that there aren't some on either end of the spectrum who are in favor of radicalizing things. But by and large, the middle rejects that from both sides. There were a lot of Democrats who voted for Bush this time around and I know some moderate Republicans who voted for Clinton in his first term. If you ignore that sort of opinion, your numbers don't mean much even if they are in some limited literal sense true. The center in the US isn't a point, it's a broad band containing the majority of US voters.
#26
MS, correct, Kofi Annan and the UN are to blame for everything. Aris, bedtime, want to be bright and fresh for orkomosia.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/12/2004 19:16
Comments ||
Top||
#27
Lex,
It is exactly because there appears to be general consensus in favor of Roe v Wade that SCOTUS can overturn it for purely legal reasons and let it be established legislatively as it should have been originally. And I agree with OS that this will happen soon.
But when the legislatures come to legislate they will start to pay attention to what their constituents think. And the constituents will pay a lot of attention to what the legislators say. And a lot of them will want to know why Scott Peterson is up for two counts of murder and an abortionist isn't even up for manslaughter. Then we will all have to spend some time discussing the issue as they do in a democracy where the laws are made by the people's representative and not by fiat. And the conventional wisdom may become very unclear.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/12/2004 20:23
Comments ||
Top||
#28
Lex, think again on SCOTUS and abortion.
There are changes coming on that one. Wrong is wrong, murder is murder, no matter how many people think otherwise.
#1
It is nothing short of remarkable how Europe continues to expect that Iran will operate in good faith on this issue. The Iranian mullahs consistently have lied through their teeth about anything and everything to do with their nuclear program. They have already admitted to procuring some of their technology on the black market. Isn't this admission of clandestine activity sufficient indication that all may not be exactly what it seems in Iran?
In a number of very telling ways, this all boils down to one central issue, namely, Bad Faith.
Europe has failed to assert itself against Iran due to overriding trade concerns and petrochemical supply. This conflict of interest has caused a distinct amount of bad faith interaction between our ostensible allies and American diplomatic interests. Furthermore, Europe continues to be delusional in expecting that Iran will cooperate constructively with respect to their nuclear program. Confronted with clear evidence of Iranian duplicity, Europe pretends that their strategic goals can be attained without clearly delineating punitive measures that Iran must face for noncompliance.
Such nuanced attempts to secure cooperation from a clearly underhanded and hostile entity is the height of stupidity. To believe that any progress is possible without having first made perfectly clear that alternative forms of intervention are just as easily on the table effectively neuters Europe's attempts at mediating this crisis. Be aware that it is not merely European complaisance that is encouraging this dangerous turn of events.
Iran's mullahs physically embody everything that is wrong with Islamism. Be it their long standing war by terrorist proxy against Israel through Hizbullah, the willful violation of international soil in the 1979 embassy takeover, massive human rights abuses or intentionally destabilizing regional security in the name of their religious goals. Again, we are confronted with Bad Faith. In this case, it takes the form of a religion that is completely warped out of recognizable shape by hatred and religious intolerance. Such malign intent is used to justify any and all forms of deceit and treachery.
It is not just in Iran that Islam is being transmuted into a Bad Faith. However, Iran serves as an adequate example and continues to justify all expectations of hostile intent upon their part. At some point, other Islamic countries will need to take a long hard look at how Iran is quite successfully besmirching the name of Islam to all and sundry. The lackluster condemnation of Iran's constant lies by surrounding Arab nations creates nothing but a perception of solidarity with the mullahs.
Such unspoken alignment casts all other putative gestures at fighting terrorism in an extremely dubious light. Even more moderate Arab cultures nonetheless demonstrate Bad Faith by their silent or tacit support for Iran. For them to simultaneously lay claim to religious persecution in the war on terrorism while engaging in this subterfuge is a clear demonstration of Bad Faith. That such dissembling is so frequently justified by the dictates of religious doctrine permanently erodes any legitimacy of their belief structure.
Soon enough, this sort of constant perfidy and sanctimonious abuse of religious freedom or tolerance will come to brand Islam permanently as an ultimately Bad Faith.
#4
Iran is clearly on the highway to hell.
The Europeans care about nothing but their lavish
pensions and the good life and will let nothing
distract them from their lemming ways.
They will gladly sell theirs son's heritage for todays "pot of schmaltz". Unfortunately for the 3E, neither the US nor Israel are fooled by the Mullah's evasive maneuvers.
Depending on the Iraqi situation, I expect some US heavy action within less then a year. I hope the US acts before we (Israel) are forced to act out of desperation.
If Israel is forced to act, it will most probably not be through any diplomatic channel (unless you consider the use of bunker-busters as a sort of extreme diplomacy).
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
12/12/2004 8:32
Comments ||
Top||
#5
Re #1 (Zenster)
I think you're too harsh and premature with your criticism. Europe has reacted to Iran's nuclear program, and Europe's reaction has caused good results so far. You are furious about your own certainty that eventually in the future Europe will yield and Iran will advance in this dispute.
Iran's economy is in a very bad state. Unemployment is very high. Large enterprises are going bankrupt. In general, Iran's economy is stagnant or even declining. In these circumstances, Europe's threats to restrict trade with Iran over this issue have exerted pressure on Iran quite effectively. I have the impression that Europe is firmly committed to staying its course on this issue.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 9:52
Comments ||
Top||
#6
Europe's reaction has caused good results so far
show me one friggin good result, UN-boy. Time bought to create a weapon to kill Joooos and Americans? We know where you stand, asshole
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 9:58
Comments ||
Top||
#7
Iran's economy is in a very bad state. Unemployment is very high. Large enterprises are going bankrupt. In general, Iran's economy is stagnant or even declining. In these circumstances, Europe's threats to restrict trade with Iran over this issue have exerted pressure on Iran quite effectively. I have the impression that Europe is firmly committed to staying its course on this issue.
If their economy is in such a bad state, where is any European condemnation of Iran's significant human rights violations? That the mullahs cheerfully divert their petrodollar wealth (handily supplied by Europe) towards building atomic weapons instead of feeding or employing their own people is essentially a war crime.
Or are you willing to argue that Iran is not actually attempting to build nuclear weapons? If you are not, do you perceive even the least difference between Iran's bait-and-switch stalling tactics and those routinely used by North Korea? Do you deny that both countries are essentially building atomic weapons out of the bones and blood of their citizens?
If you concede that Iran is attempting to build nuclear weapons, then Europe's nuanced negotiating posture is just that, a pose, and a spineless one at that. To believe that negotiations with religious fanatics, which are not backed up by the explicit threat of military intervention, have the least chance of success is flat-out delusional.
Is this the course you suggest that Europe should stay? One of totally ineffective persuasion dedicated to peaceful solutions which their adversary (yes, adversary) has ZERO intention of fulfilling? From all appearances, the only course that Europe is "staying" involves a headlong rush towards becoming Eurabia.
#8
If their economy is in such a bad state, where is any European condemnation of Iran's significant human rights violations?
Is this close enough for you? I know it's not exactly what you want, but I'm sure the Europeans have condemned Iranian human rights violations a zillion times.
That the mullahs cheerfully divert their petrodollar wealth (handily supplied by Europe) towards building atomic weapons instead of feeding or employing their own people is essentially a war crime.
No, it isn't.
Or are you willing to argue that Iran is not actually attempting to build nuclear weapons?
Yes, I think Iran is attempting to build nuclear weapons.
Do you deny that both countries (Iran and North Korea) are essentially building atomic weapons out of the bones and blood of their citizens?
I think Iran and North Korea are building atomic weapons at great and wasteful expense to their citizens.
If you concede that Iran is attempting to build nuclear weapons, then Europe's nuanced negotiating posture is just that, a pose, and a spineless one at that.
That's a non sequitur. That's your own logic, which is faulty. Your conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premise, as you seem to believe.
To believe that negotiations with religious fanatics, which are not backed up by the explicit threat of military intervention, have the least chance of success is flat-out delusional.
These negotiations are backed up by the explicit threat of economic sanctions. They have some chance of success, if Europe persists and if Iran decides that it needs trade with Europe more than it needs nuclear weapons right now.
Success isn't guaranteed. Success isn't guaranteed also if you back up the negotiations with explicit threats of military intervention.
I expect that Europe will persist on this issue because Europe very much wants to prove to the USA that it's able to succeed with its own non-military methods, and because Europe is strongly opposed to nuclear proliferation.
I expect that Iran might eventually yield, because Iran needs trade with Europe more than it needs nuclear weapons.
Time will tell.
From all appearances, the only course that Europe is "staying" involves a headlong rush towards becoming Eurabia.
I don't think so.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 13:38
Comments ||
Top||
#9
You had to leave yesterday so I'll repost in the spirt of Sunday.
Mike what would be the best way to create a more effective and vital UN? Would more money help? Or would a deep seated conviction be better? Do you think losing the powder puff blue would help? Or is the tradition to strong. Let's talk silver patterns now, I am fond of Stratevari, should the UN cafeteria settle on one or spread out the patterns in hope of spreading good cheer? Do you think UN licesne plates are a good thing Mike? Should I be allowed to buy one?
I'll be around till 3:15 and then back again as necessary.
#11
The nuclear non-proliferation regime is broken and arguably always has been. The sanctions available under the current international regime are not sufficient to stop a state that wants the bomb (and has the resources) getting it. Iran wants the bomb and will get it, unless and until someone is prepared to go further in stopping in them. Economic santions won't work unless they are backed up with military force and that won't happen unless one or more states decides to take the matter into its own hands and Iran gives them a pretext. I don't think Israel has the wherewithal, and baring something totally unexpected from Russia, this means either the USA takes military action against Iran or they get the bomb.
#12
I think Iran and North Korea are building atomic weapons at great and wasteful expense to their citizens.
Your overly polite assessment does not quite ring true. The starvation in North Korea and general poverty in both Iran and North Korea are a direct and intentional result of their respective governments' obsession with acquiring nuclear weapons.
That people must die because their own government refuses to feed them and instead funds extravagant weapons programs, is a form of intentional slaughter. Since it is done in the name military might, I equate it with a war crime against their own people. Call it a crime against humanity, if you wish. The upshot remains the same.
Iran and North Korea are murdering untold thousands of their citizens through a combination of malign neglect for the common weal and a willingness to risk their country's economic or strategic security. This is done in the name of pursuing a false sense of military ascendancy and is nothing more than tyrannical despotism.
I expect that Iran might eventually yield, because Iran needs trade with Europe more than it needs nuclear weapons.
Your assesment ignores the glaring fact that Iran has already made public pronouncements regarding how pursuit of nuclear technology is a religious duty, right alongside the annihilation of Israel. What sort of economic deterrent is going to avert such fanaticism? How is Europe able to overlook Iran's violent hostility towards its neighbors?
Throughout history, Europe's style of appeasement has never proved functional against such maniacs. Delayed application of military might in suppressing such virulent ambitions has repeatedly cost the lives of untold MILLIONS.
Europe stood idly by while millions died before, and they are once again engaging in diplomatic dilettantism while the danger surrounding them increases. Their negotiating track record is abysmal and shows ZERO promise of averting, or even stalling, Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons.
Given Europe's support for the Intifada and Hamas, it is difficult to avoid the perception that an undercurrent of anti-Semitism pervades their overly friendly tack with Iran. I'd love to be wrong about that, but unless Europe forcefully asserts itself in its dealing with Iran's hostility towards Israel, then they are complicit in seeking the Jewish state's demise.
There is no way to deal economically with an entity that sponsors terrorism whilst simultaneously deluding oneself that sanctions will have any positive effect. When dealing with those who resort to duplicity and deceit, one must do so from a position of strength or simply accept defeat as a given. Europe is negotiating itself into oblivion and endangering both the entire Middle East and America at the same exact time. This is not acceptable.
#13
As the famed Dandy Don Meredith once said, "if wishes and wants were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas."
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/12/2004 15:16
Comments ||
Top||
#14
Re #12 (Zenster): The starvation in North Korea and general poverty in both Iran and North Korea are a direct and intentional result of their respective governments' obsession with acquiring nuclear weapons. That people must die because their own government refuses to feed them and instead funds extravagant weapons programs, is a form of intentional slaughter. Since it is done in the name military might, I equate it with a war crime against their own people.
That's very loose logic. You need to be more careful about assigning intention and about assigning definitions.
I know it's fun to vent your emotions. If you want to convince people who aren't already convinced, though, you will need to argue more logically.
... Iran has already made public pronouncements regarding how pursuit of nuclear technology is a religious duty .... What sort of economic deterrent is going to avert such fanaticism?
Iran has already yielded quite a bit because of Europe's economic threats.
If Iran is so impossibly fanatic, then why do you insist that military threats would make any difference?
Throughout history, Europe's style of appeasement has never proved functional against such maniacs.
A couple weeks ago, we had a thread that discussed Nevile Chamberlain, who applied the policy that he himself called "appeasement." I pointed out that he "appeased" Hitler and that he also drew some lines that Hitler could not cross. Hitler crossed the line anyway, then Chamberlain declared war, to Hitler's great surprise.
If Iran fails to comply with the lines that Europe is drawing on this issue, then Iran might be very surprised to find out that Europe indeed imposes economic sanctions very decisively.
I think something similar might happen in this situation. Time will tell.
Europe stood idly by while millions died
The United Kingdom and France declared war on Germany. Let's not get into an argument about the "...while millions died" part, because that has lots of complications. The essential point here is that the UK and France "appeased" Germany, and then when Germany went too far, then those "appeasing Europeans" declared war.
In the case of Iran's nuclear weapons, Europe is not threatening war, but rather economic sanctions. So far, Europe has been rather firm in its stance, and I expect that Europe will persist. If Iran crosses the lines, then Europe indeed will impose economic sanctions.
Given Europe's support for the Intifada and Hamas
I don't share your impression that Europe supports the Intifada and Hamas.
Europe is negotiating itself into oblivion and endangering both the entire Middle East and America at the same exact time. This is not acceptable.
Apparently it's not acceptable with you. Europe is, however, helping to move Iran in the right direction, away from its nuclear-weapons program.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 15:30
Comments ||
Top||
#15
Here's the acid test for our European "allies": tell us, please, which is a preferable outcome in your view,
A) a nuclear Iran which does substantial trade with Europe and which menaces Israel and the new Iraqi government, or
B) a non-nuclear Iran boxed in by aggressive US military pressure including sanctions and a blockade?
Is there really any doubt which outcome the Euro Dwarves prefer? If so, then why continue the pretense that they're "negotiating" with Iran?
#16
What do you think, Mike S? Do you truly believe that the Europeans would support, under any reasonable scenario, the application of any kind of meaningful pressure on the Iranians in order to prevent their getting nukes?
#17
Re #9 (Shipman) Mike what would be the best way to create a more effective and vital UN? ....
I did read your comment the other day, but after midnight and too late to respond then.
I don't have a simple solution to the UN's problems or to the world's problems.
I don't blame the world's problems on the UN. When I see an extremely difficult problem (e.g. Palestine, Darfur, Rwanda), I don't reflexively blame the UN, as so many people here do.
The UN is a very inclusive organization, which includes good and bad states, good and bad societies, good and bad people -- and all those inbetween. We the good can rage and complain about the bad. We the good can rage and complain that they the bad are dragging us down. I think, though, that we the good are also pulling the bad up.
I think the USA is the most advanced country and society in the world. The other countries trail us by decades and centuries. Some other countries are even moving backward.
So, we should be patient. We should keep trying. We should continue to participate in the UN (which we the USA basically created) with the resigned understanding that we are making only very, very slow progress -- and that sometimes we are even moving one step backward and two steps forward.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 15:46
Comments ||
Top||
#18
That's very loose logic. You need to be more careful about assigning intention and about assigning definitions.
In the case of North Korea, at least, it's not loose logic. It's the result of a deliberate and publicly stated policy to keep the country out of the global economic system. The result is that the only income for North Korea (beyond aid, which they demand brazenly) is the development and sale of weaponry and nuclear technology.
The starvation in that country AND the nuclear proliferation are directly choices by the leadership.
#19
So, we should be patient. We should keep trying.
Getting back to the Iranian nightmare, we don't have much time left. Which do you think the Three Dwarves prefer, Mike? Containment of Iran by an aggressive US, or containment of the US in the Persian Gulf via new EU-Iran links and influence?
... which is a preferable outcome in your view, A) a nuclear Iran which does substantial trade with Europe and which menaces Israel and the new Iraqi government, or B) a non-nuclear Iran boxed in by aggressive US military pressure including sanctions and a blockade?
I don't prefer A at all. If Europe's economic pressure succeeds in moving Iran away from its nuclear-weapons program, then I would be happy about that.
I don't think the USA will exert any more military pressure on Iran than it has been doing for the past quarter century. President Bush isn't going to attack Iran any more than Europe is going to attack Iran.
Do you truly believe that the Europeans would support .... any kind of meaningful pressure on the Iranians in order to prevent their getting nukes?
Europe's threat of economic sanctions is meaningful pressure, in my opinion, because I think Europe actually would impose them and because I think they would be devastating to Iran's economy.
I don't think Europe would support US military action against Iran until the economic sanctions are imposed and fail. But that's also why I think that Europe really would impose the economic sanctions. Europe perceives that Europe itself must put up or shut up this time on this issue.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 16:01
Comments ||
Top||
#21
Some other countries are even moving backward.
So, we should be patient.
Sometimes patience is not a virtue. Patiently sitting on some railroad tracks is essentially a form of suicide.
Patiently hoping for reform in countries that are actively regressing into barbarism (even whilst they seek the most modern weapons), goes beyond stupid.
We are not obliged to be patient with those who express open hostility towards us and then go about acquiring the weapons to carry out that selfsame aggression. Confronted with tyrants who seek our demise, a most impatient attitude is required instead.
The world has shown Iran endless patience and its reward is the sponsorship of terrorism, violation of international soil, human rights abuses, institutionalized misogyny, vicious repression of political dissidents, institutionalized anti-Semitism and government-sanctioned religious intolerance. In addition, we are now confronted with their destabilization of the entire Middle East and the threat of nuclear war.
Pray tell how such a retrogressive regime has anything to contribute towards this planet's progress in the third millenium? Some make this world a better place by their arrival, others by their departure.
The Iranian mullahs cannot exit the global scene quickly enough. Furthermore, I vote that they be given every assistance in their departure, from their governmental positions and even off of this mortal coil.
#22
If Iran is so impossibly fanatic, then why do you insist that military threats would make any difference?
At this point in time, self-preservation is the only instinct that has the remotest chance of overriding the mullahs quest for atomic weapons. The threat of military intervention also makes clear that continued pursuit of nuclear capability is not on the table in any way, shape or form. Not even for use in electrical power generation.
This is what Iran ignores, Europe fails to recognize the need for and, yet, remains a critical component for neutralizing the Islamists dreams of military ascendancy in the Middle East region. It is absolutely impossible to ignore or deny that Iran's gaining possesion of nuclear weapons quite possibly would represent the most dire strategic blunder of this entire new century.
#23
Mike S, my problem with the UN (and I have been a critic for a very long time) is not that international cooperation to solve problems is not a good thing - It is manifestly an excellent thing. Nor is it that the UN frequently fails. It is trying to solve hard problems and failure is to be expected. My problem with the UN is its an ossified bureacracy incapable of doing anything and that's not the UN's fault. It is the inevitable end state of any organization that is not subject to a competetative market or under the control of elected officials. The UN is broken and is incapable of fixing itself. We have no alternative except to get rid of it and start again. Its happened once already (with the Leaugue of Nations). There is no reason why we can't have a third attempt at an international order that works.
#24
Mike, the mullahs don't give a damn about the economic health of their nation. If they did, they would not personally have looted it as they have done, brazenly and rapaciously, for the last two decades. The mullahs like all authoritarians care solely about preserving and extending their power. Unless your EU sanctions-- which I don't believe for a second the Dwarves have the slightest intention of ever imposing-- are accompanied by a wide-ranging program of political destabilization and support for indigenous democratic forces, they will have no effect on the mullahs' calculations.
I seriously doubt that the Dwarves are in favor of democracy promotion and mullah destabilization in Iran. If you have evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it.
#25
Re #22 (Zenster) At this point in time, self-preservation is the only instinct that has the remotest chance of overriding the mullahs quest for atomic weapons. The threat of military intervention also makes clear that continued pursuit of nuclear capability is not on the table in any way, shape or form. ...
So far, the current Bush Administration doesn't seem to share your panic, fury and resolve about Iran's nuclear-weapons program. The Bush Administration is responding primarily through a combination of diplomatic and economic means, applied firmly and patiently along with Europe.
The only practical difference between the USA's response and Europe's response is that the USA has little economic leverage, because we ceased our trade with Iran 25 years ago. Europe can still exert economic leverage and so is exerting it.
Your idea that Europe is somehow preventing the USA from a real intention to intervene militarily in Iran to stop Iran's nuclear-weapons program is just your own personal fantasy. The USA isn't going to intervene militarily any more than Europe is going to intervene militarily.
The USA as a government recognizes the limits of its options in this situation, even if you yourself don't.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 16:33
Comments ||
Top||
#26
Sometimes people are willfully dense.
Dubya is doing what he should do: Check The Boxes.
When all the boxes have been checked (he's played the multi-culti pissant toothless apologist game out to it's typically ineffectual conclusion) and the Mad Mullahs still pursue the course of acquiring missiles, guidance, and nuke warheads, then we shall see, won't we? Indeed, time will tell.
#28
Mike S, the USA will act militarily against Iran. However, a number of things have to happen first. One of them is the Euro/UN efforts to stop Iran getting the bomb have provably failed.
#29
Re #24 (lex): the mullahs don't give a damn about the economic health of their nation.
Demonizing your opponents is lots of fun, but you're just preaching to the choir.
I can do even better. I say the mullahs torture little children to death and then drink their blood. I say the mullahs intend to kill everyone in the entire world in order to protect their own power. So, just because I say so, are you convinced?
Unless your EU sanctions .... are accompanied by a wide-ranging program of political destabilization and support for indigenous democratic forces, they will have no effect on the mullahs' calculations.
Even if EU sanctions were indeed accompanied by such programs, they might have no effect on the mullahs' calculations. Some dictators are maniacs who won't respond to reason or threats.
Chamberlain told Hitler that if Hitler invaded Poland, then Chamberlain would declare war on Hitler. Nevertheless, Hitler invaded Poland, and Chamberlain declared war on Hitler. The threat of military war on Hitler didn't have any more effect on Hitler in 1939 than a threat of military war would have on the mullahs in 2004.
What's important right now in this situation is that Europe seems to be drawing some strict lines and telling Iran not to cross them. Iran might indeed cross those lines, but if so, then I think Europe will impose economic sanctions that will hurt Iran very seriously. The sanctions would hurt Europe too, but I think Europe will impose the sanctions anyway.
Maybe I'm wrong about that. It sure wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong. Maybe you're wrong that threats of military intervention would be any more effective.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 17:00
Comments ||
Top||
#30
Mike, the mullahs are kleptocrats on a grand scale and theocrats second. Nowhere in their hierarchy of concerns are to be found issues like "expand economic opportunity" or "make Iran a first rate technology and export-oriented economic power." They couldn't care less about sanctions beyond what those might signify for their sense of national pride. Ie, a minor irritant, nothing more. Again, if they truly cared about economic progress they would not have compiled a two-decade long record of spectacular theft and mismanagement.
#31
The only practical difference between the USA's response and Europe's response is that the USA has little economic leverage, because we ceased our trade with Iran 25 years ago. Europe can still exert economic leverage and so is exerting it.
I rather suspect that Europe's desire for Iran's oil is the real economic pressure here -- and it's not the Europeans who are applying it.
#32
Re #23 (phil-b): The UN is broken and is incapable of fixing itself. We have no alternative except to get rid of it and start again.
That's easier said than done. Few real decision-makers prefer to destroy entire institutions and start again. They prefer to reform the institutions that are established.
Write your idea on a poster and walk around Washington DC for a while and see how many real politicians join your parade. Tell everyone that you think that the destruction of the League of Nations is a good example of how this kind of proposal has worked in the past.
I agree with you that the UN is a bureaucratic, disappointing organization that is incapable of solving many of the world's problems and that the UN provides an annoying public voice to dictatorial governments and to backward societies.
So, what else is new? Those problems are inevitable in any organization like the UN. Even if you create some alternative and restrict its membership to modern democratic countries, you will soon be infuriated almost as much by that restricted membership and its inability to act.
The UN is often useful to the USA, so there continues to be a strong political consensus that the USA should continue to participate in the UN. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the UN provided strong, united, world-wide support for the USA to throw Iraq out of Kuwait. In the following years the UN imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. The sanctions weren't perfect, but they were pretty good.
The UN tries to enforce a policy of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The attempt has been partially successful, partially unsuccessful. Right now, in particular, the UN is trying to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
We might try to improve the UN's effectiveness in that effort, or we might get rid of the UN and start over. I think the first option is better.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 17:34
Comments ||
Top||
#33
Re #25 (.com) ... and the Mad Mullahs still pursue the course of acquiring missiles, guidance, and nuke warheads, then we shall see, won't we?
Yes. Maybe President Bush will strike Iran militarily. Maybe he won't. Maybe Europe will impose economic sanctions. Maybe Europe won't.
I'm perhaps just as skeptical that Bush will strike Iran militarily as you might be skeptical that Europe will impose economic sanctions.
We might agree fully, though, that Iran might not yield to either threat and that therefore Iran might (or might not) suffer consequences.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 17:40
Comments ||
Top||
#34
So far, the current Bush Administration doesn't seem to share your panic, fury and resolve about Iran's nuclear-weapons program. The Bush Administration is responding primarily through a combination of diplomatic and economic means, applied firmly and patiently along with Europe.
So, where in that "combination of diplomatic and economic means" do you place America's sale of all those bunker busting bombs to Israel?
Do you contend that this sale wasn't an overt signal to Iran of how we were willing to equip their most deadly foe (and declared target of aggression) with non-nuclear weapons capable of neutralizing their weapons program? Are you able to maintain that this was not a clear signal of looming military intervention, either by proxy or direct action?
Finally, Mike, you fully admit that Iran is pursuing atomic weapons, yet steadfastly maintain that economic sanctions are a viable method of forestalling that same capability. It is a diplomatic given that Iran's own declarations are consistently devoid of truth.
How is it then, that you can have the remotest confidence that Europe's economic sanctions will have sufficient effect so as to halt Iran's acquisition of these weapons?
At present, our world has no idea of exactly how close Iran is to completing the assembly of a nuclear device. Their constant lies and deceit effectively prevent any accurate assessment of capability. In turn, this mandates a speedy and satisfactory resolution of these concerns.
That is something which economic sanctions do not promise in the least. We have already had a clear demonstration of just how ineffective economic sanctions are, both in Iraq and North Korea. The long and drawn out agony of sanctions benefited no one except Kim Il Jong and Saddam Hussein.
Eventually, Saddam was deposed by force, not by sanctions. By using the exact same tactics as Iran is now employing, North Korea has potentially assembled atomic weapons and managed to completely stalemate progress on the Korean peninsula. How can you possibly advocate measures that might lead to a similar nuclear standoff in the even more explosive Middle East?
By every indication, Iran is determined to build atomic bombs. There is absolutely no evidence that the imposition of economic santctions would deter them in the least. Iran has declared obtaining nuclear weapons a religious duty, and being a theocratic state, that amounts to a government policy statement. Sanctions will merely give them more time to complete the building of a nuclear bomb. Even if Europe's cash flow into Iran halted, China would think nothing of picking up the slack and, in fact, relish yet another nuclear counterweight (however unstable) to American dominance on the global stage.
Failure by the existing superpowers to neuter Iran's nuclear weapons program represents the worst sort of moral abdication to a most brutal and tyrannical regime. Nowhere does such a blunder make the least sense.
#35
Re #31 (rkb): I rather suspect that Europe's desire for Iran's oil is the real economic pressure here
Europe itself will suffer economically if it imposes economic sanctions on Iran. On the other hand, the situation for Europe to do so is now better now than it has been in many years. The sanctions on Libya and Iraq are ending, and Europe now can buy oil from those two countries instead of from Iran.
This is Europe's best opportunty to demonstrate to the world that Europe's opinions about issues like nuclear proliferation must be respected. It's now or never.
Europe's perspective on Iran and the issue of nuclear proliferation now is much like Chamberlain's perspective on Germany and the issue of established European borders in 1939. The appeasement policy had been exercised to its limit. If this final limit is not enforced peacefully, then there will be no more limits or even influence. That's how I think Europe views this situation.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 17:53
Comments ||
Top||
#36
Re #30 (lex): They [the mullahs] couldn't care less about sanctions beyond what those might signify for their sense of national pride. Ie, a minor irritant, nothing more.
Well, then, they might get sanctions imposed on them. I agree with you that the mullahs might ignore the threat and continue to develop their nuclear-weapons program anyway. Apparently we disagree mostly about whether Europe really would impose the sanctions as threatened.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 17:57
Comments ||
Top||
#37
Mike writes: The only practical difference between the USA's response and Europe's response is that the USA has little economic leverage, because we ceased our trade with Iran 25 years ago. Europe can still exert economic leverage and so is exerting it.
1) I see little evidence that Europe is exerting economic leverage in the sense that they would actually go through with sanctions, etc. I see Europe dangling an economic carrot, praying hoping the Iranians will nibble.
2) I'm persuaded that at least some Europeans are more interested in containing the US than in containing Iran. For some reason they think we're the bigger threat. Sounds kinda stooopid to me, but I'm not a European.
3) There are parts of the UN that work reasonably well for a large, disparate international organization. The Security Council and the Secretary General's office aren't among those parts. While it'd be nice to reform these to the point that they would work, I have my doubts as to whether that's possible.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/12/2004 17:59
Comments ||
Top||
#38
Re #34 (Zenster): .... America's sale of all those bunker busting bombs to Israel? Do you contend that this sale wasn't an overt signal to Iran of how we were willing to equip their most deadly foe (and declared target of aggression) with non-nuclear weapons capable of neutralizing their weapons program? Are you able to maintain that this was not a clear signal of looming military intervention, either by proxy or direct action?
I think you are probably right about all that. The USA is signaling Iran along the lines you point out. The signals are, however, only subtle and implicit.
You seem to be much more critical of Europe's subtle, indirect signals to Iran than you are of the USA's subtle, implicit signals to Iran.
The Bush administration has not declared openly that it will strike Iran militarily if Iran continues to develop nuclear weapons. On the other hand, Europe has declared openly that it will impose economic sanctions.
It is a diplomatic given that Iran's own declarations are consistently devoid of truth. .... our world has no idea of exactly how close Iran is to completing the assembly of a nuclear device. Their constant lies and deceit effectively prevent any accurate assessment of capability. In turn, this mandates a speedy and satisfactory resolution of these concerns. That is something which economic sanctions do not promise .... We have already had a clear demonstration of just how ineffective economic sanctions are, both in Iraq and North Korea.
Iraq did stop manufacturing weapons of mass destruction. I'm sure Iraq intended to resume manufacturing them later, but Iraq did stop while economic sanctions were imposed.
North Korea has submitted to some controls and principles for periods of time. North Korea is wavering. I think North Korea is feeling tremendous pressure. I myself expect that the North Korean regime might collapse rather soon.
Eventually, Saddam was deposed by force, not by sanctions.
Yes. Saddam stopped manufacturing weapons of mass destruction while the sanctions were imposed and while the USA exerted military pressure, but he was not deposed by the sanctions and mere military pressure. That doesn't mean, though, that economic sanctions and mere military pressure were entirely ineffective.
By using the exact same tactics as Iran is now employing, North Korea has potentially assembled atomic weapons and managed to completely stalemate progress on the Korean peninsula.
We have been applying military threats and pressure on North Korea for 50 years. In fact, we even militarily invaded North Korea and militarily occupied North Korean territory for many months. Nevertheless, North Korea remains an outrageous outlaw to this day. Some opponents are incredibly stubborn, no matter what you do short of annihilation.
China would think nothing of picking up the slack and, in fact, relish yet another nuclear counterweight (however unstable) to American dominance on the global stage.
I don't think so.
Failure by the existing superpowers to neuter Iran's nuclear weapons program represents the worst sort of moral abdication to a most brutal and tyrannical regime. Nowhere does such a blunder make the least sense.
The world isn't abdicating on this issue. The world is responding in a manner that you think is too moderate and that you predict won't work. The world thinks your proposed responses are too reckless.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 18:24
Comments ||
Top||
#39
Re #37 (Steve White) I'm persuaded that at least some Europeans are more interested in containing the US than in containing Iran. For some reason they think we're the bigger threat.
I agree. That's one reason I expect Europe to firmly resolve to demonstrate that its alternate response of diplomatic and economic measures can work effectively. This is a rare opportunity and challenge for Europe to show the USA its capability. Europe feels it must put up now or shut up forever with regard to the USA.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 18:29
Comments ||
Top||
#40
You seem to be much more critical of Europe's subtle, indirect signals to Iran than you are of the USA's subtle, implicit signals to Iran.
Why yes, as a matter of fact I am. Murderous terrorists and their sponsors need to be confronted with swift annihilation should they persist in their willingness to commit atrocities. Indirect and subtle measures do not carry enough weight to force the hand of fanatics. The threat of extermination does.
I hardly think that selling Israel the exact weapons needed to quash Iran's nuclear program was anything in the way of "subtle." I would rate it more as a "shot across the bow." Quite effective too, by all measures. Now, more than one country has the capability (and will) to neutralize Iran's atomic weapons program.
The major problem here is that should Iran obtain nuclear weapons, there is every indication that they will use them. The mullahs have in as much announced that even Iran's total obliteration would be a worthy tradeoff in exchange for their having destroyed Israel. This one fact alone is sufficient to warrant regime change in Iran.
#42
Re #40 (Zenster): Murderous terrorists and their sponsors need to be confronted with swift annihilation should they persist in their willingness to commit atrocities. Indirect and subtle measures do not carry enough weight to force the hand of fanatics. The threat of extermination does.
So far, the Bush Administration has not threatened Iran with annihilation and extermination.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 18:59
Comments ||
Top||
#43
IMO - blah,blah,blah, the only thing more weak and useless than the EU is the UN.
I suspect the EU will continue to complain and do absof**kinglutely nothing and let the US clean up the mess AGAIN.
#44
So far, the Bush Administration has not threatened Iran with annihilation and extermination.
I doubt very much that I'm alone here in saying that just maybe this needs to change. An insufficiently high enough price has been attached to participation in terrorist activity.
Only when the cost is prohibitive will those who practice it begin to rethink their strategy. Individual death may not be enough. Massive economic collapse and marginalization of a terrorist's entire home-culture may need to be considered.
This world does not have enough spare time for experimentally verifying what constitutes the minimum amount of force necessary to thwart terrorism. In the time required to determine such finely tuned measures, much more innocent life will be lost.
If other cultures cannot bring themselves to begin aggressively prosecuting the terrorists within their midst, they become accomplices through inaction. More than likely, a few hundred or thousand Iranians will die as they discover that defying international demands to abandon nuclear weapons research comes with a price attached.
The sooner our gloves come off in fighting terrorism, the more quickly the issue will be resolved. Permitting these violent psychotics time to reproduce, indoctrinate and disseminate their warped ideology merely increases the amount of innocent life lost on both sides.
Iran is prime indicator of how crucial decisive action will be in the future. While only a few thousand might die as a result of immediate military intervention, should the mullahs come into possession of nuclear weapons, all of Iran's people could perish.
The opportunity for relaxed decision-making is passing swiftly. A nuclear capable Iran will see the dawn of far more severe and irreversible measures. This is the mullahs' ultimate gift.
#45
Steve W: I'm persuaded that at least some Europeans are more interested in containing the US than in containing Iran. For some reason they think we're the bigger threat.
The simple truth is that Europe is not directly threatened by Iran's (future) nuclear weaponry. The targets will be the US & Israel. The hope within Europe is that a nuclear Iran will force the US to change (soften) its stance not only in the middle east, but all over the world. Any weight loss on the part of the US, will only mean a relative weight gain for the Europeans, since they can't really gain weight on their own (ceteris paribus). Iran acquiring nuclear weapons can only be seen as a good thing by the Europeans. It is not a European problem.
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/12/2004 19:55
Comments ||
Top||
#46
Which is exactly why Mike S. is way off base in his hopes and expectations re: Euro action.
Right now, the 2000km range Iran claims for its missiles would hit only Turkey and a few parts of southeastern Europe. Give them a year or two and that range will probably increase by another 1000KM. By the time the Euro 2 really internalize implications of that, it will be way too late to do anything about it.
Israel will have a missile shield by then, if all goes well - although Iran is so close it would be hard to detect and kill missile attacks from there. Europe won't have any, but since it will be mostly Islamic by then it won't matter ... unless they make the mistake of going Sunni rather than Shia, of course.
Posted by: too true ||
12/12/2004 20:48
Comments ||
Top||
#47
FAS.org Iran missile database lists the under development Shahab5 with a range to 4,300km and the Shahab6 with a range out to 8-12,000 km (e.g. an ICBM capable of hitting the US). Also notice all their missiles are North Korean origin and manufactured in Iran. The NK TaeponDong4 is already thought to be able to hit the US west coast from NK.
Better that war is faught before the mullahs, who by definition believe that Islam must rule over the planet, can destroy US cities.
Posted by: ed ||
12/12/2004 21:37
Comments ||
Top||
#48
Re #45 (Rafael): The simple truth is that Europe is not directly threatened by Iran's (future) nuclear weaponry.
That's true, but Europe is also very interested in establishing and enforcing the "rules of the game" in international relations. Europe is interested in a stable world, with stable trade and stable resolution of disputes. Europe does not want backward countries like Iran to have nuclear weapons, even if those weapons don't threated Europe directly.
To continue my Chamberlain analolgy, Nevile Chamberlain didn't care hardly at all whether or not Danzig was assigned to Poland or to Germany. But Chamberlain did care that Germany under Hitler's leadership would not yield to any international controls. And so Chamberlain declared war on Germany.
I think that Europe views the current situation likewise.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 21:50
Comments ||
Top||
#49
MS: To continue my Chamberlain analolgy
truer words were never spoken. Amen
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/12/2004 21:54
Comments ||
Top||
#50
The hope within Europe is that a nuclear Iran will force the US to change (soften) its stance not only in the middle east, but all over the world
Rafael puts it well. The reason that good Eurocop/bad UScop won't work here is that Europe doesn't see Iran as anything more than a misdemeanor perp. Again, the Europeans' containment effort toward Iran is a sham. They're on the same side.
Speaking of which, I rather think it's the mullahs who are dangling economic carrots for the export-hungry Euros, not the other way around. Germany and the other export-oriented Euros, suffering greatly now from their pricey currency, need the Iranian market more than the mullahs need the European market.
#51
Europe is interested in a stable world, with stable trade and stable resolution of disputes.
Well, that certainly explains France holding military maneuvers with communist China and the EU's renewed desire to sell them advanced weapon sytems. Sort of reminiscent or their position with Iran. Sell 'em whatever you can and talk your way around the sticking points.
Mike, you keep mentioning how appeasement has been of use. When did it ever stop a war from happening? So far, in all the examples you cite, war was the final outcome and appeasement routinely proved to be of no real use.
#52
Europe does not want backward countries like Iran to have nuclear weapons, even if those weapons don't threated Europe directly.
That is not at all obvious. I think the position of France, in particular, favors nuclear proliferation to the Muslim countries of the middle east as a counterbalance to the US and Israel, as they saw their own WMD program under de Gaulle and his immediate successors.
Posted by: too true ||
12/12/2004 22:51
Comments ||
Top||
#53
Re #51 (Zenster): When did it [appeasement] ever stop a war from happening? So far, in all the examples you cite, war was the final outcome and appeasement routinely proved to be of no real use.
Sometimes appeasement simply delays the war. Such was the case when Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler in relation to the Sudetenland postponed the beginning of World War Two from August 1938 until Sepember 1939. During that interval, the UK continued to prepare for the war that eventually came. The UK was better prepared in 1939 than it had been in 1938, but even in 1939 the UK was not prepared to go on the offensive against Germany. The so-called "phony war" lasted for many months, as UK and French forces were simply assembled along Germany's western border.
Those people who criticize Chamberlain for not beginning the war in 1938 or earlier imagine mistakenly that the UK could somehow have intervened militarily effectively to prevent Germany from seizing the Sudetenland or the Rhineland. Interventions in either case well might have ended in complete fiascos that would have discouraged further military resistance to Germany.
When did appeasement ever stop a war from happening? It happens all the time, whenever some compromise short of war is accepted.
The USA did not intervene militarily when the Soviet Union suppressed the Hungarian Revolution in 1956 or the Prague Spring in 1968. On those occasions, many people complained that the USA was appeasing the Soviet Union and explicitly compared that appeasement to Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler with regard to the Sudetenland.
Some people (The John Birch Society) even concluded that President Eisenhower must be a secret agent of the Soviet Union, since he appeased the Soviet Union in the case of Hungary. In fact, though, Eisenhower simply recognized the limitations of the USA's military and political abilities to take stronger actions.
In not every situation is war the wisest response, although you seem to think it always is.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 23:16
Comments ||
Top||
#54
Appeasement is appeasement is appeasement. There is no way of sugar-coating it.
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/12/2004 23:23
Comments ||
Top||
#55
Re #52 (too true) I think the position of France, in particular, favors nuclear proliferation to the Muslim countries of the middle east
That's an excellent argument, especially with regard to the period before Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor. I think France has probably changed its policies since then, but I'm not prepared to argue with you about that.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 23:24
Comments ||
Top||
#56
A final question, Mike. This is, what, the bazillionth round of negotiations that the IAEA and Europe have gone through with Iran? What has changed? What significant progress has been made?
No extensive inspections have been permitted. There is no expectation of transparency from the Iranians. Instead, from all indications, Iran has sanitized certain contaminated sites and begun constructing others that appear to be intended for the R&D of lensing explosives used to detonate a nuclear device. Still other sites were originally constructed with hardened features built in.
None of this signifies the least intention of compliance. Quite the opposite. It seems as though Iran fully anticipates the need to protect its facilities from aerial bombardment and has routinely sought to conceal or disguise their appearance.
How can anyone in their right mind assume that it is possible to constructively engage Iran in terms of ceasing its atomic weapons development program? They have literally designed in non-compliance from the very start.
And in the case of Iran, any delays are intolerable. This is the lesson we must learn from North Korea. Iran is merely stalling for time until they can unveil (or test) a functional nuclear device and then set about destabilizing the entire Middle East.
I do not view war as the ultimate solution to all disagreements.
I most certainly do view war as the correct and proper way of dealing with terrorists. In combating those who would perpetrate mass murder atrocities, appeasement is right out.
#58
The stakes are linked to the lethality involved and in whose hands it will be.
This is not about conventional forces occupying land in an effort to prevent political separation from a sphere of influence. This is about offensive nuclear weapons which can be targeted at anything within range - far outside the sphere of influence of the Iranian regime. The Soviet-Hungarian vs America-Iranian situations have absolutely nothing in common.
The Iranians are the most transparent bunch of power-hungry idiotarians driven by an implacable ideology ever - in my experience. Rafsanjani has spoken clearly and unmistakably on numerous occasions.
Nukes & Mad Mullahs do NOT mix, IMHO. I certainly believe Bush is of the same mind and will do whatever he must do to prevent or end such a combination.
#59
I'll grant Mike one thing: it's not at all clear that the Bush admin would itself launch strikes against the mullahs. My guess is that would be up to the Israelis. What we can and should be doing is what Ledeen's been tirelessly advocating for years already: support the indigenous opposition by every means at our disposal and seek regime change from within. However I'm pessimistic about hte prospects for same, as a large part of our ability there depends on a CIA that is revealing itself to be as decadent and morally corrupt as it is incompetent.
Overall, I'm a pessimist on this one. We're running out of time and have no good options.
#60
Re #54 (Rafael): Appeasement is appeasement is appeasement. There is no way of sugar-coating it.
An individual or a society can't always do everything it would like to do to resist evil. Sometimes the opponent is more powerful. Sometimes you are inhibited by other responsibilities or circumstances. Sometimes you feel that you will be able to resist more effectively at a later time than you can resist now.
In the meantime, you take various actions that prepare you to respond more effectively in the future. Life is full of compromises, appeasements, delayed reactions, and postponed gratifications.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 23:41
Comments ||
Top||
#61
"postponed gratifications"
Lol - this one goes over like a lead balloon 'round here! I recall a cartoon from Gulf War I which was as fast and one-sided a "war" as the world had ever seen, yet people still complained quite a bit... the cartoon showed Geo41 wearing an apron and had Saddam stewing in a big pot on the stove... there was a "typical" American family waiting at the dinner table watching "Who's the Boss" on TV and the teeange kid calls back over his shoulder to the kitchen and says, "Can't you like microwave it or something?"
I hear that quite a bit hereabouts regards what seems slow movement by Bush. But he's done what he's said up til now, so... How long we have until the Mad Mullahs are "ready" is unknown to us, but I'll lay odds it's not such a mystery to the admin. The Iranians are not happy with the Black Hats and have tons of relatives - living in the US and abroad. I'll bet serious money we have some very decent hard intel on what's going on inside Iran... enough? timely? sufficient to organize / support a native overthrow? I dunno. But I do have faith that Dubya meant what he said. That will have to be good enough, for me and for now.
#62
Re #56 (Zenster): No extensive inspections have been permitted.
Inspections have been permitted. They just aren't extensive enough to satisfy you. I suspect, though, that no inspections would ever be enough to satisfy you.
.... Iran has sanitized certain contaminated sites and begun constructing others .... None of this signifies the least intention of compliance.
The USA's effort to compel the Soviet Union to comply with inspections took many years of firm persistence. In the meantime, the Soviet Union used many methods to conceal its weapons and deployments. Eventually, though, the Soviet Union did comply with inspections and did destroy all its intermediate-range ballistic missile systems.
In the case of Iran, similar efforts will be difficult and might eventually fail. Or they might eventually succeed.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/12/2004 23:51
Comments ||
Top||
#63
The USA's effort to compel the Soviet Union to comply with inspections took many years of firm persistence.
You're comparing apples to oranges. Iran is not a nuclear armed superpower and it is precisely that status we are attempting to prevent them from obtaining. Dealing with the Soviet Union took a much more strategic approach than is required with Iran.
All efforts should be directed towards denying the mullahs any access to nuclear weapons and to hell with their prestige, image, face, or whatever other humiliating aspect they might find in such actions.
Perhaps you do not regard Iran's possession of nuclear weapons to be the profound disaster that I do, but I'm confident that history would quickly bear out my own suspicions.
Iran has yet to demonstrate any sort of good government or meticulous stewardship of their people's national heritage. I see no reason to believe that they will finally begin doing so once they acquire atomic bombs.
#65
Iran is a terrorist state that has striven for the past 25 years to export its Shia revolution. Iran supports terrorist organizations in Lebanon and Palestine. It has carried out terrorist actions in many countries, as far away as Argentina.
Now Iran is developing nuclear weapons and is threatening to use them against Israel.
On the other hand, Iran has enjoyed little significant success in these efforts. Iran has practically no air force or navy. Iran exerts practically no foreign influence outside of the Shia parts of Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon. Iran is not allied with any foreign states.
Iran's economy is extremely dependent on oil exports. Iran's abilility to export oil is very vulnerable. The US Navy could very easily blockade all Iran's ports. If Europe decides to stop buying Iranian oil, Europe could rather easily find other sources of oil to replace Iranian oil.
When Iran has allowed elections that were relatively free, the elections were won decisively by candiates who advocated reductions of the mullahs' dictatorial powers.
So, let's keep the Iranian threat in a proper perspective.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/13/2004 0:14
Comments ||
Top||
#1
Protecting Afghanistan's young democracy has become the most urgent priority for American commanders frustrated by their failure to capture al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, who disappeared after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States.
writes Stephen Graham, a frustrated reporter. "How can I capture the idea that America is weak, evil and failing, when Sadaam Hussein was toppled and the Afghan democracy is succeeding?" "I am stuck attempting to wordsmith fantastic successes into failures using repetitive little catchphrases like this one."
#1
Yep, that's what a lovely Iraqi/Kurd immigrant told us over dinner last night. He'd just spoken to his siblings back home (his brother wanted to compare the worth of various cars -- he was looking to buy yet another one), and was table-poundingly emphatic that the elections must go off as scheduled (yes, that emphatic!).
#2
The Kurds have been patient and have subsumed their desire for independence to work for a unified Iraq. They may not continue to be team players if this election is postponed -- and I wouldn't blame them.
#4
Stopping an election through violence is a very, very hard thing to pull off. Even if you attack a dozen different (armed) polling stations at the same time, all they have to do to counter it is to extend their hours. And if you manage to terrify a small town into not voting, all you have done is to disenfranchise the tiny number you have intimidated--resulting in a loss of power for your side. The only real way to derail elections is through duplicitous or weak political leaders.
#5
I may have missed it but have the parallels to the US election of 1864 been discussed?
A nation at war with itself, an unpopular President, large portions of the country unfit to hold elections, widespread violence, foreign influence in the form of "invaders" aka immigrants?
It wasn't until Lincoln started achieving significant military wins that the tide turned in his favor, in particular Sherman's victory in Atlanta.
The US in 1864 had seen the deaths of hundreds of thousands in the Civil War and was still at war with itself, and yet American's voted.
And we elected someone I don't think - I could be wrong - the NY Times called "illegitimate".
#6
The violence is more likely to be carried out among the areas where the terriorist can operate/hide. So in effect, those areas which tolerate the butchers are the ones most likely not to get a chance to vote. There's something fitting about that.
Posted by: Don ||
12/12/2004 10:28
Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Senior Shiite cleric Sayyed 
A local court in Izhevsk (capital of the autonomous republic of Udmurtia bordering with Tatarstan in the south) pressed criminal charges against two members of the 
The Tajik Prosecutor General's Office pressed charges against leader of the 
NAIROBI — Somalia's parliament passed a no-confidence motion against the country's new prime minister and his cabinet yesterday, sacking a government that was sworn in less than two weeks ago in an attempt to end 13 years of anarchy in the Horn of Africa nation, an official said.
Two unidentified persons detonated a bomb at the home of top Nepalese bureaucrat, Chief Secretary Dr. Bimal Prasad Koirala, in the Nepalese capital early Saturday morning, police said. The chief secretary is the most senior government employee. It was the third bomb blast in the Kathmandu Valley in three consecutive days. Although the police suspect Maoist rebels to be the culprits, the Maoists denied responsibility in telephone messages to some media outlets.
Kuwait said on Saturday it had put behind it its anger at the Palestinian leadership's perceived backing of the 1990 Iraqi invasion, as it prepared to receive PLO chairman Mahmud Abbas on a landmark visit on Sunday. "We consider the issue of the position of the Palestinian Authority (leadership) towards the Iraqi invasion as over. We welcome the visit of PLO chairman Mahmud Abbas," Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah told reporters.
SRINAGAR, India - Indian troops killed three 
The Foreign Office has denied local press reports that Maulana 
