Topic: 9-11 (Read 23350 times)

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #50 on:** October 08, 2002, 07:07:08 AM »

Quote from: Banshee

Erm, speaking of outgunned Demo, I tried to jump in on the whole deal too, and Paco's six-guns started ablazin'...

Well, I still believe that my position had merit, and, at least to me, more than a little truth.

And Chris, I DID mean the post quality, not the loading time.

Now, now - I just said what I would've said to anyone who walked cold into the middle of a firefight: DUCK! Oops, too late! Too bad!

And c'mon, I actually apologized to you for it. Believe me, you are not likely to see THAT from me often! Go ahead, hold your breath till the next one comes along.

Regards merit - I responded accurately, IMHO. I just did it so badly that I felt offended, too, when I read it wearing your shoes - something I actually try to do before hitting Submit - though anzac doesn't think so.

I work hard on trying to "grasp the nubs" as I call it (Frank Zappa referred to it as the "crux of the biscuit"!); finding the nexus points on which events turn. My last response to anzac is an example - there had to be 3 conditions present to turn that situation from one full of hope - to one of pure shit and despair - in my view, that is. And I explained it as carefully as my patience would allow this morning. I figure he will pick one tiny thing out, focus on it, and miss the whole matrix. Hey, that's the way it goes in these forum thingies.

If you wanna retry the case, then let's. I'll explain my position and nubs without too many motherfucker and cocksucker emphasizers, I promise. I will not even tell you to take a flying fuck at a rolling donut - that's how committed I am to the Truth (note capital "T") and to communication (note lowercase "c"). Honest. I proved I can do this in my retry posts to you, right?

I have a personal theory that the efficacy of actual communication is inversely proportional to the number of participants. I've toyed with the idea of taking it 2 levels further, to wit: adding the text ", on the first pass, and directly proportional to their Sum IQ, on the second pass, and inversely proportional to their personal involvement in the issue, on the third pass - yielding no actual participants except yourself. The Rest are just static." But it's just too tinny and lacking in razzmatazz, no matter how true it feels to me. I have all sorts of thresholds and such that I'd eventually have to add to satisfy myself - making it a hodge-podge not worth reading, much less contemplating, so I've left it at the original state.

So, wanna communicate???

Dark Shade · « **Reply #51 on:** October 08, 2002, 07:31:43 AM »

Nah. No worries Paco. Now that I know who you are, I'm sure things will get along pretty damn good...

I save "gunning em down upon entry" shit for my friends.

Banshee · « **Reply #52 on:** October 08, 2002, 08:27:14 AM »

Communication is fine Paco. No worries.

Regarding your effectiveness-- I understood you well enough to get the point of what you were saying. If you think that I missed the details, and that is important to you, go ahead and expound on them in a post and I'll read it.

I realize that I stepped into it, and I expected what came out. What somebody thinks of me because of my opinions over the internet matters, on the general scale of importance, about as much as shit from a camel in the middle of the Sahara to me. What does interest me is how informed my opinions are; tested by the amount of relevant information that is exchanged. I have been debating long enough to not care so much about opinions of opinions-- they're all irrelevant anyway.

Make sense?

Binoboy · « **Reply #53 on:** October 08, 2002, 10:08:18 AM »

>here on GTG (How DO you guys refer to this site?)

Hmmmm... I believe we refer to it as something along the lines of "teH GeEkeRy", usually followed by "OMFGLOL!!1!", just for reference purposes.

Demosthenes · « **Reply #54 on:** October 08, 2002, 10:23:58 AM »

As for the last part - Ha! You'll never be outgunned by anyone! That would be the day! I'm a hack English mechanic - and you're a goddamned best-selling author! I don't even pretend in the dark that I do more than overwhelm them with sheer volume!

Thanks! I'm flattered.

Regards your first sentence - I am more than happy to hear this - I wondered why you (and Lacerda and Joe Sixpack and others) hadn't jumped in. That wildman, Pbsaurus, did - and he was just lightening the tension! I didn't think my take could be 180 deg from yours, anyway. And since I had read many eloquent and reasoned posts of yours, I did (do) hope you would weigh in and apply some of that magic to the threads.

I honestly couldn't put anything together that sounded any better than "me too!", so I was satisfied with observing for a change. It's a lot of work being as big a blowhard as I am; it's nice to take a break and let someone else do the heavy lifting once in a while!

I would, if it's comfortable over here on GTG (How DO you guys refer to this site?), like to understand your reference to a "comfortable arguing position" - not to pry, but that's an intriguing tidbit and I want to understand. Your main squeeze isn't a Lebanese Princess or something and hates that MoFo DeGaillo prick, right? <G> If that's the case, flame me!

No, by that I meant "I do not feel comfortable enough with my knowledge on the subject when compared to the level the discussion has reached, so any stand within it I might make would be precarious at best, so I prefer in those situations to abstain."

It comes back to that old adage, "it is better to remain silent and look the fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt".

Now which threads DO you disagree with? Fire away! I'll take notes!

Not many... I agree wholeheartedly with your position on the Saoodis and their politics... I have just never been able to put it into words as well as I have seen you do, primarily because most of my opinions on the subject have been based on hearsay, suspicions, and "news" and "accounts" that I consider suspect as well (i.e., the mass media).

We are in the unfortunate position of being obligated by treaty to lend support to Israel, aside from that, my firm opinion is that we should let the whole region disintegrate without our involvement. The barbarians want to live as savages? Fine. Let them. We can get oil from other sources (and primarily do anyway), and we most certainly don't need their sand, 14th century rhetoric, or money.

As for Iraq, I'm in a difficult, if well-reasoned position. I am against hostilities towards Iraq at the moment, but that doesn't mean I'm a dove, and that I'm just unilaterally against war across the board.

We need to deal with Hussein and his thugs, but the Bush administration is really going about this the wrong way, and with poor timing and even poorer tact.

One thing we most certainly need to do is provide more support for Iran's reform movement and make a solid ally out of them. Out of all of the Middle Eastern states, Iran to me seems to be the most likely place to find themselves moving out of savagery and into modern, civilized global society, but in order for that to happen, they will need to move and grow as a republic. They are taking steps in the right direction, but it will likely take a couple of generations before we can really consider them reformed and free.

Because of that, we need to get in on the ground floor with Iran, and form a solid, trustworthy alliance with them NOW, not as a forceful imperialist military power, but as one free society greets and welcomes another burgeoning free society with open arms, a sort of pat on the Iranian shoulder and saying "hey, we were really hoping you guys would 'get it' eventually... welcome to civilization! We were pulling for you and we're very glad you're taking steps towards enlightenment!".

Unfortunately, the way things are looking, Iran's reformation might just as easily topple into a pit of retarded, witless religious fanaticism and barbarism, particularly if we keep up all this sabre-rattling in their direction.

If we can make a strong ally out of Iran's future free society, we can basically say FUCK the Saoodis and everyone else in the region that wants to behave like a fricken three year old. Want to punch your neighbors and steal their toys? Fine. Go ahead. We'll keep open trade status with Iran and simply shake our heads at you. And by the way, if you so much as spit in the direction of Iran or our other allies in Europe, we'll take ALL of your toys away and put you in the corner without supper, you little brats.

We HAVE to let them fight it out and then deal with whomever is left with swift, firm, decisive force, otherwise they'll never learn. If we get involved in every single petty dispute, we make nothing but enemies by our actions.

If we stay completely out of it, they will point the finger at us for our inaction, but that's better than being able to hold up a dead baby while screaming about a US rocket that hit a daycare or something. Let them hold up that dead baby and scream about an IRAQI rocket, or a JORDANIAN rocket, or a SYRIAN rocket, and let us just let them work it out of their system. Whatever is left will likely be worth a fight for us, not this petty two-bit dictator shit that isn't even worth our time.

</rant>

I sure would like to engage you more often. Your Libertarian stand and your statement to the effect that the whores (Demo's - sorry, my term for 'em - and Pub's) had stolen your country certainly had the ring of truth and conviction to it. I don't remember precisely which / where I read it, but it sure as hell struck me as a war-cry worthy of a stand-alone thread. I happen to think that almost all of our Original (read: created by Continental Congress) Institutions are quite wonderful, but are infested with self-serving vermin, at times. Once in awhile we have to come along, get pissed off, and clean one or two of them out! So I definitely separate the Office from the Officeholder, and give respect to the former even when I consider the latter to be a total ass.

Keep that up and I don't think you and I will ever engage tete-a-tete, Paco. There can be no sincere debate if we both constantly agree with each other. We can, on the other hand see if anyone around here is willing to pick a fight with us and tag-team 'em... though in all honesty I don't see that happening any time soon. Chris is going to be one bad dude someday when it comes to forum arguments, I think... but in the mean time let's try to be good rolemodels for him and others that are watching.

Also, I think if we're not careful, people might think that I am just an alternate login for you or vise versa... we're a bit too close on a number of things (and how we express them)... I think we'll both need to make a conscious effort to avoid sounding too much alike!

MISTER MASSACRE · « **Reply #55 on:** October 08, 2002, 10:02:33 PM »

I'm thinking that between the two of you, some kind of internet think-tank can be formed; the beginning of societal leadership in an online environment.

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #56 on:** October 09, 2002, 12:31:46 AM »

Quote from: Banshee

Communication is fine Paco. No worries.

Make sense?

Yup. I won't rehash old hash unless you want it... So you're SAVED!!!

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #57 on:** October 09, 2002, 12:38:46 AM »

Quote from: Binoboy

>here on GTG (How DO you guys refer to this site?)

Hmmmm... I believe we refer to it as something along the lines of "teH GeEkeRy", usually followed by "OMFGLOL!!1!", just for reference purposes.

Ugh... That's too long! It's supposed to be SHORTER, not LONGER. And getting all that mixed case shit right so the young cybertwerps (who seem to LOVE that shit more than sex; Consolation Prize: There will only be ONE generation of these... Can you say biological box canyon?) won't flame me. Fuck it.

I'd hafta keep that in a paste buffer or something.

Nawww, no good. I'll just wing it and do it my own way, I guess.

Thanx for the info, though - at least I'll know what I'm being zapped for!

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #58 on:** October 09, 2002, 02:34:47 AM »

Quote from: Demosthenes

As for the last part - Ha! You'll never be outgunned by anyone! That would be the day! I'm a hack English mechanic - and you're a goddamned best-selling author! I don't even pretend in the dark that I do more than overwhelm them with sheer volume!

Thanks! I'm flattered.

[/b]

Tis' Truth.

I honestly couldn't put anything together that sounded any better than "me too!", so I was satisfied with observing for a change. It's a lot of work being as big a blowhard as I am; it's nice to take a break and let someone else do the heavy lifting once in a while!

Now I'm flattered. Methinks the tag-team thing is a good idea. I spent over 5$ USD yesterday just responding to anzac on HN. I THOUGHT this was gonna be cheep - only 1baht/minute = approx 2.25 cents/minute. But I had no idea just how long I took to write /rewrite/edit/redit/yadda3 stuff. Shit! Part of it is how slow these 'Net cafe connections are: at present, this guy is running 8 machines off of a 56K modem connect. It is NOT a very good situation. I think I'll just do this one more reply to you and then bail until he's not so busy. Of course, according to the "plan" ->I<- will be busy later, so this will be it for today!

No, by that I meant "I do not feel comfortable enough with my knowledge on the subject when compared to the level the discussion has reached, so any stand within it I might make would be precarious at best, so I prefer in those situations to abstain."

It comes back to that old adage, "it is better to remain silent and look the fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt".

I've heard the saying, of course, but it's probably obvious that I haven't the smarts to abide by it. Sheesh!

Now which threads DO you disagree with? Fire away! I'll take notes!

Not many... I agree wholeheartedly with your position on the Saoodis and their politics... I have just never been able to put it into words as well as I have seen you do, primarily because most of my opinions on the subject have been based on hearsay, suspicions, and "news" and "accounts" that I consider suspect as well (i.e., the mass media).

Well, I sure wouldn't wish 'first-hand' knowledge of this place (ref to SaoodiLand, not TL!) on anyone, except an arch-enemy. When various folks here ask me if I know a kickass Network Guy or WebApps Guy or whatever, I'll say "Yes." <preganant pause> "Well, are you gonna tell me about him?" "No." "Oh. Oh!" And they don't ask anymore. The money's great, but the "life" sucks so bad that you hafta be a semi-twisted loner to make it long-term. I read. Tons. That, and the 'Net connection, saves my sanity. And I am semi-twisted - self-educated and raised. And a loner - I've been on my own since 16 and, of these last 34+ yrs, married for 10 and single father for 10 - so I've been alone for the last 14. And it seems to suit me fairly well. When quizzed about getting remarried or similar, I usually respond with, "Darling, I don't want to own it, I just wanna borrow it for awhile. And don't worry, it's an infinitely renewable resource - though while I am on the clock I will definitely try, I won't use it up." That usually puts the kabosh on such talk permanently with that person.

We are in the unfortunate position of being obligated by treaty to lend support to Israel, aside from that, my firm opinion is that we should let the whole region disintegrate without our involvement. The barbarians want to live as savages? Fine. Let them. We can get oil from other sources (and primarily do anyway), and we most certainly don't need their sand, 14th century rhetoric, or money.

I've got a real respect for individual Israelis, having worked with about 30 of them up close for a few months way back in my Army daze. To a man, they were serious and intelligent and tough. Impressive is the word. It was back in 1970, but I doubt that their average soldier has changed too much.

This respect acts as a political millstone for me, cuz I've often wanted to say "Fuckit" - wall the whole thing in and just throw arms and ammo over the wall. Last man standing gets the rock farm.

But in my observations, watching the pot boil and boil over, I have decided that the Israelis, regardless of who is leading their Govt, have almost exclusively responded to provocation, not initiated it. I know that many say this is BS or that it's impossible to pick a point on the circle to start keeping score, but that's an illusion in my book: it's not a circle (of violence or whatever) it is a linear timeline. I believe I demonstrate this point somewhat well in my last response to anzac on HN.

As for Iraq, I'm in a difficult, if well-reasoned position. I am against hostilities towards Iraq at the moment, but that doesn't mean I'm a dove, and that I'm just unilaterally against war across the board.

We need to deal with Hussein and his thugs, but the Bush administration is really going about this the wrong way, and with poor timing and even poorer tact.

You summed it up well. I know this clown DOES have to go. I don't know that the time is now. Until I am convinced that now is THE time, I think they are overreaching and using it to obfuscate - there are other things we should be concerned with... And as immortalized in the Clinton years (a topic I would like to cover with you sometime), "It's the ECONOMY, Stupid!" I believe this applies and Bush & Co. are just trying to stir up patriotic duststorms to get them thru the election. And this means, to me, that if one, just ONE, American serviceman/woman loses his/her life in some Iraq escapade, then Geo & Co. are guilty of manslaughter, if not Murder One.

BTW, I do not subscribe to the idea that there is a major conspiracy in progress to steal my rights. We are too well armed for anyone to actually pull that off permanently. They will only get scraps and crumbs, in spite of the hue and cry. I think our Atty General is a complete dolt, in fact. I don't think Ashcroft would last 15 minutes outside of his ideological bubble / Beltway cocktail party. Dog food.

One thing we most certainly need to do is provide more support for Iran's reform movement and make a solid ally out of them. Out of all of the Middle Eastern states, Iran to me seems to be the most likely place to find themselves moving out of savagery and into modern, civilized global society, but in order for that to happen, they will need to move and grow as a republic. They are taking steps in the right direction, but it will likely take a couple of generations before we can really consider them reformed and free.

Amen - you hit it on the head. Iran IS a modern society, youth-heavy demographically, and hungry to throw off "The Guard" - that vestige of the Iranian religious revolution when the mullahs came to power. The political landscape of Iran is very interesting and the main institution they invented to control democracy ("The Council" I think it's called; maybe it's the "Committee") is still there only because the electorate's choice (80+%, I believe), Pres Khatami (sp?), hasn't yet decided to press the issue home and declare it null and void. He's been nibbling around the edges.

In one well-informed article (don't have the link here, of course), they indicate that he is positioning things such that they will have to violate the Constitution to prevent him from reforming and de-toothing them. Such actions would not be tolerated by the youthfull mass of the Iranian voters, getting more and more impatient with all of the idiotic religious restrictions placed on them. If they were turned loose, they would form a Govt based on the US, a Constitutional Republic - and become the most progressive country on the planet.

Their demographics would certainly give them a good shot at it. Islamic crap is amazing - consider that you are not allowed to date at all, etc. - in effect, you do not get laid until your arranged marriage, and the req's for that mean you will be well into your professional career (if your family isn't filthy rich) at 25-29 before you can afford it. Think about that - and the wiring that sez "NO fucking WAY am I gonna WAIT that LONG!" Poses a serious problem for the religious squirrels - in ALL Islamic countries, whether Shia or Sunni doesn't matter - same for both. Implosion is what is going to happen in all of these Arab and Persion (to cover Iran and the fact that they are NOT Arabs!) countries. Because of sex. Simple as that.

Iran Timeline: The Islamic weenies take over. Ban everything, including evil birth-control, and then 25-30 years later they find themselves contronted with a self-educated literate society with a HUGE bubble of young people who are not very religious (knowledge of the Shia version of Islam is important here), certainly not blinded by it, and don't remember any of the actual "bad" aspects of the West, but do see a shining future in progress. And, because of the wiring, they want some serious reform regards dating and marriage, et al.

How's that for poetic / biological justice?

Because of that, we need to get in on the ground floor with Iran, and form a solid, trustworthy alliance with them NOW, not as a forceful imperialist military power, but as one free society greets and welcomes another burgeoning free society with open arms, a sort of pat on the Iranian shoulder and saying "hey, we were really hoping you guys would 'get it' eventually... welcome to civilization! We were pulling for you and we're very glad you're taking steps towards enlightenment!".

Amen. They can come sit at the big table with the adults as soon as they "get it."

Unfortunately, the way things are looking, Iran's reformation might just as easily topple into a pit of retarded, witless religious fanaticism and barbarism, particularly if we keep up all this sabre-rattling in their direction.

If we can make a strong ally out of Iran's future free society, we can basically say FUCK the Saoodis and everyone else in the region that wants to behave like a fricken three year old. Want to punch your neighbors and steal their toys? Fine. Go ahead. We'll keep open trade status with Iran and simply shake our heads at you. And by the way, if you so much as spit in the direction of Iran or our other allies in Europe, we'll take ALL of your toys away and put you in the corner without supper, you little brats.

I'm not worried about them - they want OUT from under the mullahs.Only Khatami's (sp?) slow-motion approach to throwing off the mullahs gives me and degree of pause. Beautiful imagery! Perfect conclusion.

We HAVE to let them fight it out and then deal with whomever is left with swift, firm, decisive force, otherwise they'll never learn. If we get involved in every single petty dispute, we make nothing but enemies by our actions.

If we stay completely out of it, they will point the finger at us for our inaction, but that's better than being able to hold up a dead baby while screaming about a US rocket that hit a daycare or something. Let them hold up that dead baby and scream about an IRAQI rocket, or a JORDANIAN rocket, or a SYRIAN rocket, and let us just let them work it out of their system. Whatever is left will likely be worth a fight for us, not this petty two-bit dictator shit that isn't even worth our time.

</rant>

This is the old damned if we do / damned if we don't dilemma - and it lead me to start quoting Randy Newman's "Political Science" tune. I, like you , am fed up with this absurd requirement on the US that we help everyone and, yet, not interfere in any way. Using our Foreign Aid to influence events in our national interest is the name of the game - everyone does it, and I mean everyone, but suddenly (as the only "Superpower") we are not allowed to? Fuck 'em.

Often, it's our misappropriated largesse that allows the shitheads in foreign Govts to remain in power, simultaneously thrashing us for not solving all of their problems while demanding more aid. Consider the riots in Cairo a few weeks ago when the news was "released" (read: prejudicial rant by an Egyptian Minister - and Mubarek must've approved it) that the US had turned down the Egyptian request to increase US aid to them. We did Not say we would stop it entirely or even cut back, we just did not agree to increase it. There was rioting in the streets and demon-fucking-strations about Evil America. So. Would it be any fucking worse if we said, "Fuck you. You get NOTHING until you become a bona-fide democracy and learn how to behave!" Probably, but not by much. I am getting closer and closer to the extreme on this, ala the Political Science lyrics. We are not going to be allowed to play by the same rules as everyone else. On top of that, even though we are playing politely and trying, we will still be bashed and short-changed and cheated and fucked over.

Mebbe it's time to either withdraw, or pull out a big stick and respond in kind. Hard to call and hard to do, given the automatic brakes applied in our political system to any real radical change. Do we play Woodrow Wilson - or Teddy Roosevelt? Do we have any other choices? Does it matter, if the various factions can damp or stop the change anyway?

This may be where you and I can do the antagonistic thing. I don't think we agree on this last little antagonistic bit I threw out there. Do you carry a Big Stick, Demo? (Ha!) Go ahead and answer if you dare! That's a classic "Do you still beat your wife?" question for one who doesn't believe we should ever use our military might to get what we want without being attacked first.

Did too! Did not! Etc.

I sure would like to engage you more often. Your Libertarian stand and your statement to the effect that the whores (Demo's - sorry, my term for 'em - and Pub's) had stolen your country certainly had the ring of truth and conviction to it. I don't remember precisely which / where I read it, but it sure as hell struck me as a war-cry worthy of a stand-alone thread. I happen to think that almost all of our Original (read: created by Continental Congress) Institutions are quite wonderful, but are infested with self-serving vermin, at times. Once in awhile we have to come along, get pissed off, and clean one or two of them out! So I definitely separate the Office from the Officeholder, and give respect to the former even when I consider the latter to be a total ass.

Keep that up and I don't think you and I will ever engage tete-a-tete, Paco. There can be no sincere debate if we both constantly agree with each other. We can, on the other hand see if anyone around here is willing to pick a fight with us and tag-team 'em... though in all honesty I don't see that happening any time soon. Chris is going to be one bad dude someday when it comes to forum arguments, I think... but in the mean time let's try to be good rolemodels for him and others that are watching.

Also, I think if we're not careful, people might think that I am just an alternate login for you or vise versa... we're a bit too close on a number of things (and how we express them)... I think we'll both need to make a conscious effort to avoid sounding too much alike!

Oh yeah? Take That! and THAT! Oof! Pow! Splat! Etc.<BEG>

Ok, enuff, I know.
<30>

Demosthenes · « **Reply #59 on:** October 09, 2002, 08:22:29 AM »

BTW, I do not subscribe to the idea that there is a major conspiracy in progress to steal my rights.

I don't either, though I do think that there are some in higher offices that wouldn't shed a tear to push us further towards totalitarianism. But for the most part, most of this is just knee-jerk response to stimuli. As the other saying goes, "never assume malicious intent when gross incompetence will suffice".

I have always found it amusing that people in debates always accuse me and other Libertarians of "having too much faith in people to do the right thing", when most of us fight tooth and nail to keep power out of the hands of government because of our LACK OF FAITH in people!

As for your question about carrying a "big stick", I'm an ex-military type, myself, so I fully understand the need for force when appropriate.

When appropriate.

When it comes down to it, I'm probably closer to isolationist. The Middle East conflict honestly doesn't affect us directly as much as many think it does, and as you point out, we're damned if we do, damned if we don't.

So to me the correct answer is to be involved as little as possible.

Do I think we used appropriate force in Afghanistan? No. I don't think we used ENOUGH force there.

Do I think we should invade Iraq? Not without proof -- not rhetoric -- that Saddam is a threat to the US and our allies. Demonstrate proof to me and I'll be more than happy to see him removed from power with extreme prejudice (read: special forces bullet in the head).

However, if we go around invading everyone on the planet that we decide we don't like, we will be what most of those primitives like to call us... imperialist powermongers who will use force first to get their way, and fuck the little guy.

That's the kind of shit the Soviets did. That's the kind of shit Red China does. That's what WWII Germany did, as well as their allies, Italy and Japan.

Military strength, while essential for defending our borders and our citizens, is not what made this country great. When it started out, we didn't have much for military strength, but we had something for our citizens to fight for, a great big fucking carrot dangling out in front of their noses: A chance to have a country of their own, a FREE country in which one could live in peace however one wanted, as long as one didn't harm anyone else. A country in which no one told you who you could trade with, or how much, or FOR how much. A country where its citizens could come and go as they pleased, and say and think and believe what they wanted.

That's not the direction I see us going. I see the opposite trend, and whether it's intentional or not, we are moving slowly towards a state where force and fear are the carrot, and the freedom is being shoved under the rug. And I don't mean just to our own citizens; I mean we are threatening others outside of the US.

And while these threats are in response to hostility towards our citizens, and in some cases have been justified, in other cases it frightens me to think that at any time these threats could be turned towards those of us in the United States that dissent, and speak our minds about it.

I used to think I was paranoid; now I'm not so sure.

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #60 on:** October 09, 2002, 11:45:34 PM »

Quote from: Demosthenes

BTW, I do not subscribe to the idea that there is a major conspiracy in progress to steal my rights.

I don't either, though I do think that there are some in higher offices that wouldn't shed a tear to push us further towards totalitarianism. But for the most part, most of this is just knee-jerk response to stimuli. As the other saying goes, "never assume malicious intent when gross incompetence will suffice".

[/b]

Well put! I am somewhat reassured by the fact that there are limits to the term of every office. Only somewhat because people keep sending the same lamebrain twits back, time after time. I was in a Cong. District once where the joker in office had been there for over 30 yrs - he was why I began writing in Felix The Cat, etc. He was as dumb as a brick - and this is first-hand cuz my ex was a reporter for a Dallas newspaper back then and we took him out for dinner for her to interview him (she didn't want to go alone with this goof!) - and it was an education in image vs. content.

The somewhat comes from the idea that when the occupant changes, no matter what the agenda of the "party" (a goofy moniker for the entity, don't you think?), each individual will spin it for himself as he plans how to make himself seem more important than he is.

I have always found it amusing that people in debates always accuse me and other Libertarians of "having too much faith in people to do the right thing", when most of us fight tooth and nail to keep power out of the hands of government because of our LACK OF FAITH in people!

Ah, the Alexander Hamilton School of Politics! He felt the same in his day: the backwoods hicks couldn't be trusted to see through rhetoric and promises... so he championed the Electoral College - at least that's the story I was taught. The fact that we were a Representative form of Govt was the first level of indirectness / safety. He wanted it one additional step, the electoral college would be initially stuffed full of intellectuals, so that the fools in the crowd couldn't put a total zeros in the top slots. That's a lack of faith, too, eh? <G>

As for your question about carrying a "big stick", I'm an ex-military type, myself, so I fully understand the need for force when appropriate.

When appropriate.

When it comes down to it, I'm probably closer to isolationist. The Middle East conflict honestly doesn't affect us directly as much as many think it does, and as you point out, we're damned if we do, damned if we don't.

So to me the correct answer is to be involved as little as possible.

...Editor's Note<g> I've just re-read this response and it's a mixed bag - not as clear or direct as I'd like, but my time-on-station is limited, so I'll have let it go without further editing - apologies! <BEG>

I've said before that I consider the M.E. "problem" to be the tiniest hair on the tip of the tail of the dog - and it has been trying to wag the dog for 50 years. I don't believe there is a please 'em all answer. But there may be a serendipitous silver lining to this cloud...

History, both Commonly Held... and then the Seamy Underside...
The guys who have oil that we need have been sticking the Palestinian issue into everything they do with us, as if they can dictate our Foreign Policy. They have largely gotten away with it because we need their fucking oil. I don't much appreciate that, myself. Being dictated to by such people gives me the creeps, makes me want to take a shower, and really pisses me off to boot. I like the way Giuliani gave Prince Walid his fucking $10M check back when Walid implied that the US deserved the 9/11 attacks because of Policy, which was dictated by Treaty, which was a result of our not liking the fact that more that 10 nations delared war and attacked (or supplied support to the attackers of) a tiny little enclave of Jews the day after the Brits, who drove the ships full of the Jewish immigrants and drew the fucking lines in the sand, hastily withdrew and said "You are now a country! Cheerio!" as they sailed off. This was Europe's baby all the way - their guilt-response for allowing the Nazis to do their thing unchecked for years. It was their bag of shit tied with a ribbon and left on OUR doorstep because they KNEW we wouldn't allow it to happen AGAIN and they wanted OUT of the driver's seat. It's hard as hell to find an honest History of the Jews, because there is so much crap, pro and con, floating around and so many players with so many differing motives. The simple truth, though, is that that this was dumped in our laps intentionally by the Euros. They are STILL anti-Jewish (Note I didn't say anti-Semitic - the Arabs are Semites, too - surprise!) to this day, and feel guilty as hell about it. Good. I hope they never get a good night's sleep ever again. The US. Ahhh, the US. We're just too good, or too bad, to be true. Wide-eyed wonderchild of the planet. Gifted and gullible. Free and free-spending. Naive and almost anti-Nationalistic. Born suckers. Backing the Underdog is a tradition, I guess.

Academia has positioned us for many of our involvements - convincing Politicians of Domino Theories, taking stands in places such as Korea and Viet Nam, and such. I do not believe in forcing ourselves into situations that aren't really in our National Interest - which is more limited than most countries, in spite of our influence or what the Talking Heads say. I think most 'Mericans are isolationist at heart and only come out to play when forced by events. Shit, we have almost everything we need (exceptions: chromium, chip mfg plants, titanium, cheeeep Chinese Prison Labor...), so...

A very interesting part of the issue is that the Global Village shrinks by magnitudes almost every day. Laughable, I first thought, example: Last night on CNN they actually spent over 1 minute on a story in China where people who fly kites, a Chinese custom / pasttime of great popularity they said, were being warned by officials that if these kites keep getting tangled in power lines that it would result in fines. I kept waiting for a punchline. That was it. A sort of Public Service Announcement in English on CNN aimed at the Chinese who fly kites near power lines. Weird Tingly Feeling? What's next? Czech Elementary School lunch menu announcements?

The joke in S.A. among expats is that we never should've drawn down the US forces after Gulf Storm. Hell, we're here, we're an overwhelming force, let's just stay. But, since we did leave without really thinking through the fact that we were here, they were the ultimate jerks (or 2nd ultimate, the Chinese are still around), not to worry, we can drill through glass with cheap bits. I just wish Geo 41 hadn't been so fast to unload the neutron gear we had built. No glass necessary.

Okay, here's my most honest view:
<megalomania>
We have to have oil - for about another 15-20 years, anyway. No getting around it. It's in the hands / under the sands of the biggest bunch (or 2nd biggest, the Chinese are still around) of assholes ever to populate the planet. The Islamic extremists among these cretins have suddenly decided that they wanna play hardball - with US in particular. The so-called moderate cretins, who keep telling us that Islam is about peace and platitudinal pleasantries, don't stand up to them and reclaim their incredibly asinine religion. Every Friday, at the main Prayer service when they add in a little speech / sermon and tell the faithful what to think this week, the steady line is that the US is the Great Satan and All Muslims must stand together. So we're drafted into a game of unknown proportions and duration. Some would bemoan this and gnash their teeth, wear sack cloth and ashes, etc. Some would say it's an opportunity disguised as a problem. I'm sure you see where I'm going with this. All that needs to be established is that nothing will mollify these cretins and the realization that this is, whether we want it or not, a fight to the finish, and the fact that it just so fucking happens that they have something we need, whether we like THAT or not and suddenly there is a convergence that makes this a no-brainer. This is a fight we actually want, if we're honest enough to define the rules correctly and accurately to include the religion that is the actual source of the conflict. All of this touchy-feely crap about it NOT being about Islam is just wishful thinking on Blair's and Bush's part - they HAVE to say this at the moment. Sooner or later, however, it will become (as an IBM instructor said to me 30 years ago): "Intuitively obvious to the casual observer" that it IS about Islam - and nothing else.
</megalomania>

Do I think we used appropriate force in Afghanistan? No. I don't think we used ENOUGH force there.

Do I think we should invade Iraq? Not without proof -- not rhetoric -- that Saddam is a threat to the US and our allies. Demonstrate proof to me and I'll be more than happy to see him removed from power with extreme prejudice (read: special forces bullet in the head).

I am a true believer in (Colin Powell got the sound bite, but he didn't invent the idea) Overwhelming Force approach to conflict - and the Pattonesque idea of making the Other poor fool do the dying. Quick - name any of the tribes of Afghanistan that didn't change sides depending upon the bribe size offered! Buzzzzzzz! Trick question! They were ALL for sale! The legend of the Afghan fighter - what a crock of shit.

The poor numbnut Arabs, true believers lured there by bin Laden, et al, were the only ones who really gave us anything like a stand-up fight - cuz they had nowhere to run to... the Afghans had changed sides for 30 pieces of silver and were now helping (sorta kinda little-bit when in the mood - much ordnance expended killing rocks to make the 'Mericans happy) hunt them down. It was all or nothing when the fights occurred with the Arabs.

Nowadays, it sniper and guerilla shit. I personally believe that we should either do it right or get the fuck out. Right: sweep the whole fucking place by grid and disarm every swinging dick we meet - or blow him away. Don't use or trust any Afghani. No warlords allowed - take them out hard if they don't disarm peacably, ala Wyatt Fucking Earp, no bullshit. No more diggin holes and waiting for someone to take a potshot at us. OR, we get the hell outta there and let the Euros fuck it up AGAIN.

However, if we go around invading everyone on the planet that we decide we don't like, we will be what most of those primitives like to call us... imperialist powermongers who will use force first to get their way, and fuck the little guy.

That's the kind of shit the Soviets did. That's the kind of shit Red China does. That's what WWII Germany did, as well as their allies, Italy and Japan.

Agreed. Only fight where our National Interests are REALLY are involved. I'd like to ally / do biz with Russia - we have what they need and vice versa. Gotta wait for them to lose Putin first, though.

Military strength, while essential for defending our borders and our citizens, is not what made this country great...

This is the true Libertarian argument, I believe, so I'll do it in a separate response. This puppy is getting too long and I haven't even begun! Shit!
---
Big Wrap-Up to this response. Talk about Megalomania and Grandiose!
---
I believe we were led into / dragged into most of the fights we had prior to and including WW-II. After that, we became the de facto Western military power - and found ourselves in Korea, et al - often without really knowing how we got there or who was doing the leading. THAT is scary, yet it has continued to this day. Who is whispering in the politician's ear? What's his favourite axe?

I believe that some of the situations, like Korea, existed because we did not finish what we started. Patton, et al, were the first conspiracy theorists - and they have been proven largely correct by events.

On the whole, I think we (Americans at the end of WW-II) believed in the innate goodness of man and thought that if we demonstrated how cool and successful and downright FUN Democracy was (baseball, apple pie, Peggy Sue's hooters!) that everyone would want some - a preventative for future conflicts. I think we accepted the idea that Ward (The Beaver's Dad) Cleaver, or his equivalent in Gov't, would have the answer to most any problem, in 30 minutes or less. I think we actually bought our own PR - because for one of those brief shining moments in history, we were as good as our word - something that can seldom be said about individuals, much less nations. The Marshall Plan is an example worthy of note.

Of course, Pollyanna was being kinda silly and foolish thinking that everything would remain static... that goodness would win out cuz there were no bad men. No Mao Tse Dungs. No Stalins. No Ceaucescus. No Castros. No Samosas. No Mohammed Aidids. No Perons. No Idi Amins. No bad ideas. No Ultra-Nationalistic Serbs. No Savak. No Apartheid. No Stasi. No Turkish Prisons. No Drugs. No Militia. No Racism. No McCarthyism. No Religious States. No Slavery. No Colonialism. No Cultural Revolutions. No Opportunism. No Lies. No Deceipt. No Greed. No Problems. No shit.

She was wrong.

Two sides to the coin...

So now what? When and where do we get involved? Who says? Who goes? Who dies? Does ANYONE, outside of the US, outside of the subset who will go (or their immediate families), outside of the people actually on the recon team, outside of the frightened (but here he is, doing his part anyway) 19 yr old Point Man, really care?

That is the Isolationist taken to the extreme.

So now what? Do we make a list of our ideological adversaries? Prioritize the threats? Devise strategies for each? Pre-emptively take them out? Rinse, repeat as needed. Build a DisneyLand in the bomb crater that used to be their capital? Does ANYONE who doesn't have a direct stake (commercial or personal) really care?

That is the Adventurist taken to the extreme.

To tell you the truth. I do not know the answer, the mix, that the right or wrong of any individual point is still right or wrong when taken outside of the macro or the micro bubble that contains it in the Great Venn Diagram.

I have a saying, or ten thousand actually, that I use for my own personal test board. I think one of them is germane in that I have applied it in the past to try to understand just what I was thinking and how my choices and events transpired as they did.

It is sooooo easy to search, so hard, to the exclusion of all else, for so long, for the object of your desires, only to lose sight of it, and become lost in the act of searching.

I figure that we must come back to Zero. The Starting Point after each foray no matter which side of the coin it happens to be - else we forget the other - and it takes both for the coin to exist.

I figure that sometimes we have to say:

"Hold it - you, the kid in front, Point Man, c'mon back - this is the wrong trail, son - we're headed back. A hot meal and shower back in the Company Area. And you've pulled point enough, anyway, I'd say. You'll get Tail-end Charlie on the next picnic."

And sometimes we have to say:

"Ma'am, would you like that DisneyLand SuperDuperWaterSlide Douser T-Shirt in L or XL - you sure got a nice set of headlights, if I do say so, uh, ma'am. You're gonna look GOOOOOD after your ride, uh, ma'am. Mind if I take pictures?"

So. Let's take one thing at a time. Examine it rationally in light of our own National Interests, debate the hell out of it openly (hear that Geo 43?), and then decide go / no-go. I trust this form of decision-making, not the Grand Plan (hear this, Dickie Veep?) which is obsolete (assuming it was ever worth warm spit in the first place) after the first item is checked off - or the secret backroom crap. Let our national conscience guide us. (I nominate Colin Powell to chair the debates and determine the winners.) Specify the action. Identify the benefits. Wear the other guy's shoes, if that makes sense - fuck it, if not. Debate. Decide. Go / No-Go. No apologies. No Congressional Hearings AFTER the FACT, EVER AGAIN. Speak now, or forever hold your peace, Period. Pussies. Cowards. Pansy Bastards. Politicians.

Iraq? Not today, thanx. Call it #2, but don't hold your breath. We might give it good swat via smart-weapon if we pick up something juicy that can be corroborated, but no Israeli-style helicopter gunships firing fucking Zuni's into crowds, thank you. Mebbe the Iraqi's will grow a pair and do it thmselves. Nahhhh. Nevermind.

Palestinians? No, not until we solve more pressing issues. Call it #3 on the Tasking Order - where it will probably stay forever. It will be a non-issue before it ever reaches the top slot.

Al Qaeda, et all. Yes, please. And his Daddy and all of his Brothers. Mothers and Sisters have no say, so share no blame, we'll take them in as refugees... all others, fuck the lot of 'em. When the Chief Saudi Mullah said, "This is between Freedom and Virtue" - he said a mouthful.

Methinks he should now swallow.

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #61 on:** October 10, 2002, 01:49:17 AM »

Arrrgggghhhh!

I just lost about 2 hours worth of typing in, what I assume, was a session timeout. F U C K !!!

Chris, if this is true, why do we have a session timeout? It's not like anyone is gonna really come along and post as me. Honest. I don't need the protection. If there must be one, then make it ridiculously long, like 3 hrs.

Demo - I'm really pissssssssed - I was doing the 2nd half - the Libertarian Shuffle with you.

Ok. I'm hungry and have to each. I'm been on this PC for 4 hrs.

I'll resume tomorrow.

F u c k.

Demosthenes · « **Reply #62 on:** October 10, 2002, 09:48:02 AM »

Lol. I feel your pain (re: losing everything you've just written). That's why I've gotten into the habit of writing posts in NOTEPAD if I am spending any more than five or ten minutes on them. It's happened too many times to me and I agree that it's frustrating.....

I was wishy-washy on the subject of the "big stick" because I'm on the fence, but not informed enough to make a solid decision (read: I was hoping you'd make efforts to persuade me one way or another).

My guts tell me that we need to defend our country and its citizens, and the immediate threat right now are the remaining Al Qaeda leadership at large, and that's about it.

Getting further involved with Iraq at this point will endanger our interests as well as our troops overseas, all over the world.

Getting further involved with Israel (beyond some material support to which we are obligated) will also endanger our interests as well as our troops overseas, all over the world, as evidenced by the USS Cole, the barracks in Saudi, the World Trade Center, Lockerbie, et al.

I do agree with you that the Israeli's are worthy of respect. They are tough bastards that were provoked in the 60's by the entire Arab world, and stood alone and defeated them to the point of shame and embarrassment. They are second to none when it comes to dealing with terrorists -- by necessity. They will never give up, and they now -- because of the cowards who insist on blowing up schools and public buses to make a point -- have a leader to match their toughness with military ferocity.

In short, I really don't think they need much support from us. If anything, we could stand to learn a thing or two from them.

But I don't personally like the idea of us having so many troops stationed permanently outside of US borders in places like SA. Fuck the Saoodis. At this point, I'm willing to say fuck the Egyptians and fuck the Kuwaitis as well, until those two countries' leadership can ensure that they can rein in their own populace.

While Egypt's president is constantly in full-suck mode on Uncle Sam's nether regions, his citizenry hates us, hates our involvement in the ME, hates our military presence and frankly I agree with them on that note.

Kuwait? They LOVE us. But as demonstrated by recent events, there are some pretty real dissenters there as well, and while their gov't has pooh-poohed this attack on US troops there as bad, the citizenry has declared the moron a "martyr" and are prancing around, calling for "death to America". Apparently they liked the Iraqis plundering their oilfields, hanging men and women from light poles in their cities and stealing their property. Perhaps we should remove our military presence from Kuwait and tell Iraq "I guess Kuwait doesn't like us helping them keep you guys out after all. Do as you please."

Same with the Saudi's.

Something tells me that Iraq probably wouldn't be a bother to us if we basically exited the region and let Saddam's neighbors deal with him. Like we have both said, we're damned if we do something, we're damned if we don't... but if I have to be damned, I'd rather take the road that makes us fewer long-term enemies, costs fewer American lives -- civilian AND military --- and doesn't involve messy, expensive, almost-always-futile endeavors like "nation building", and leaves us as a high-road noninterventionist free society that welcomes developing nations as they "get it" (like we were discussing with Iran, above).

And if they never "get it", fuck 'em. Let them deal. If they threaten us, we destroy them, swiftly, decisively, overwhelmingly, and we end it there, and ensure they never are a threat again (thank you, Orson Scott Card). We knock them down, and then we kick them repeatedly in the face until they no longer get up. Period.

And we continue to do that to anyone -- and I mean ANYONE -- in the world who decides they want to take arms against our country, or arms against our citizens abroad.

Sudan is harboring people who helped plot the World Trade Center/Pentagon attacks? Then we will remove Sudan. Yemen is harboring people that are involved in financing Al Qaeda? Then we will remove Yemen.

As yet, however, nobody has been able to demonstrate anything of the kind with Iraq... so we leave Saddam alone unless he makes a mistake that justifies our removing his country from the world map.

By "remove", I mean we destroy them militarily, utterly removing every single piece of their government with flying lead and overwhelming force and we install a government that will guarantee us that it will not happen again, at their own similar peril if it does. It's amazing how much control a strong leader can exert over his people when his own life is going to be cut short by a smart bomb if he doesn't play ball.

pbsaurus · « **Reply #63 on:** October 10, 2002, 01:10:57 PM »

Another tactic is to highlight anc ctrl-c before you hit submit, just in case. I'll do that with my few long posts.

Anonymous · « **Reply #64 on:** October 10, 2002, 02:07:13 PM »

I believe we already do have a reason to take him out. Saddam violated one of the terms that he agreed to after his first ass pounding in the Gulf War. He agreed that he would no longer have weapons of mass destruction within his control.

Because he violated that, we have the right to oust him from his position.

Whether or not the weapons are really there, that's another question. But assuming that he does... then he's agreed to his own demise.

I don't see how we can be sure since UN Weapons Inspectors haven't even been able to get into his country yet to see what he has.

I do agree with you Demo about us not being involved over there would be the better way out. It would cost less money, and most importantly less lives. If we simply forgot about the Mid East, most likely most of the threats will go away. Some will still exist, such as bin Laden, but people like Saddam and the Saudis will "cool down" in a few years.

Let the UN do its job and keep our troops within our borders until we know we are the target of a horrific event. At this point, we have not solid evidence that Saddam is going to use those weapons on us, or even anyone else.

Edit: Oh, and for the session time out thingie, I believe it is good for one hour. I am going to change that right now to prevent that from happening again. I didn't think that someone would take over an hour to type something up.

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #65 on:** October 11, 2002, 03:20:17 AM »

Quote from: Demosthenes

Lol. I feel your pain (re: losing everything you've just written). That's why I've gotten into the habit of writing posts in NOTEPAD if I am spending any more than five or ten minutes on them. It's happened too many times to me and I agree that it's frustrating.....

[/b]

There are problems with being on a 'Net Cafe computer - such as the fact that these are stripped down - but Notepad was there - so, in fact, I have no excuse! The real surprise was that, unlike on HN, when I hit the back button I got a "Page Expired" response. I had become spoiled by HN and was, to quote Arafat everytime he gets caught on anything, "Shock - ed! I am shock - ed!" Doh! I've learned my lesson and am in Notepad at this moment!

I was wishy-washy on the subject of the "big stick" because I'm on the fence, but not informed enough to make a solid decision (read: I was hoping you'd make efforts to persuade me one way or another).

My guts tell me that we need to defend our country and its citizens, and the immediate threat right now are the remaining Al Qaeda leadership at large, and that's about it.

We agree then as Iraq and Palestine are #'s 2 & 3 on my Task Order - only the Terrorism threats, Al-Qaeda being the most well-known, deserve immediate and unconditional response - whenever and wherever no matter whose turf -- Hear that, Germany? Afghanistan is becoming the same old factional warlord quagmire it has been for the last x00 years. It seems they are incapable of learning any new tricks and doing it "right" (i.e. having a real nation, instead of the same-old, same-old) is beyond them. Kharzai strikes me as a fashion horse, as opposed to a Pres. He is already complaining that we haven't solved everything and their disorganized chaos is, somehow, a failing of the West. I think we should pull our Special Forces Presidential Guard off him and see if that makes him feel a bit less strident and act less grandiose. He is the leader of a Rock Garden. He expects us to turn it into a Paradise that never before existed. He can't even command the respect of enough people to maintain the capital Kabul, without big-time military back up and constant presence. Afghanistan is, by any measure, a minor victory evolving (reverting) into a major failure.

Getting further involved with Iraq at this point will endanger our interests as well as our troops overseas, all over the world.

Agreed. The House just voted and cleared the way for Bushie's Excellent Adventure. Expect it in Mid-Dec to Mid-Jan timeframe. I expect to be out of S.A., one way of the other, by 1st week of Feb, if not sooner.

Getting further involved with Israel (beyond some material support to which we are obligated) will also endanger our interests as well as our troops overseas, all over the world, as evidenced by the USS Cole, the barracks in Saudi, the World Trade Center, Lockerbie, et al.

All of Arabia, and most everyone else as well, thinks Israel is our lap dog. Ha - some lap dog! This li'l fucker can bite! Israeli leadership has exactly the same responsibilities to its public as any other democratic Gov't. The protection of its citizens is and must be first and foremost. They will do this as they determine is best (i.e. we cannot dictate THEIR Foreign Policy and then bitch about others dictating OURS) - and that may or may not coincide with what we want from them. We have to divulge WHY we want 'X' action / reaction from them in advance - and this puts them in the middle of our decision-making process - not much better than having the damned Saudis in there. So, just to follow whatever policy we favour in the region, we find ourselves having to make deals with all of the parties from whom we require cooperation - usually both sides - revealing our positions in advance and effectively neutralizing any chance to make bold moves or surprise anyone. Consequently, our M.E. policy looks limp and lame and late to the game when we try to walk the middle line. However, if we find ourselves favoring one side (e.g. "Suicide Bomber Blows Away Pizza Parlor Patrons") - then, at least, we can move boldly on ONE side of the issue, such as calling for Arafat to deliver or step out of the way for someone who can.

BTW, regards the Khobar Towers incident, which is what you were referring to as the barracks, I believe, I used to go over there often back in '92-'93. My services as a PC software guy were "volunteered" by an American prick I reported to - so he could build up brownie points with the Military for some obscure reason (Smuggling in contraband for him, perhaps, under Mil cover). Truth is that he really DID help them. Immensely, in fact. He provided the 82nd Airborne with superb Aramco maps, extremely accurate maps developed 9by expats, of course) for exploration and well servicing, which were FAR SUPERIOR to the "maps" provided by the Saudi Gov't - their paranoia knows no bounds and a good map showing wells and well service roads, topology, etc. was too much info for the Saudis. Even though we there to save their sorry asses, they gave our Mil these goofy shitty maps. Believe it - I know it's true. Anyway, I knew several of the Air Force people working in one of the Khobar Towers. Hell, the story of why the Towers were available for the AF is one of the funniest tales of S.A.! It's kinda long, so maybe another time. I had a thing going with SSgt <mumble-mumble>, a very hot (did I mention TOUGH?) chocolate dream-machine with awesome booty and zero inhibitions. She ran one of the office support sections. Our problem was we couldn't take it out of the Towers - due to local customs - so we were, how do I say it? - closet friends. The things she could do standing stock-still (serious, uh, er, muscle-control, yeah that's it!) was something to experience. She was damned-near a professional in that regard! I can clearly recall her constantly saying to me, "Quiet, Jeeezus, be quiet!" - between squeals and giggles. I got a complex. Thought I was Jeezus. Hey, no one argued with SSgt <mumble-mumble> more than once. <BEG> Oh. Uh. OK... Since everyone was, more or less, a professional soldier, I would not be much surprised to find some of those I knew were still there when the bombing occurred in June, 1996 - only 3 yrs later. I searched the Killed / Injured list and didn't recognize anyone's name, but hell - half of those I knew were known by the nick, not legit name. They didn't list "Go-rilla" or "Bitch-Killer" or "Queen Bee" as memory serves. It isn't much surprise that it took until June, 2001 - 5 full fucking years, before there was sufficient cooperation and investigation to lead to indictment of the 13 Saudis and the 1 Lebanese asswipe(s) - or that they were all Hezballah (backed by Iran). Perfectly typical mish-mash clusterfuck insanity.

I do agree with you that the Israeli's are worthy of respect. They are tough bastards that were provoked in the 60's by the entire Arab world, and stood alone and defeated them to the point of shame and embarrassment. They are second to none when it comes to dealing with terrorists -- by necessity. They will never give up, and they now -- because of the cowards who insist on blowing up schools and public buses to make a point -- have a leader to match their toughness with military ferocity.

They are the one Govt entity I can think of that, when they say they are gonna do something, well you can take it to the bank and cash it - whether you happen to like it, or not. That certainly gets my attention! You're undoubtedly right, too, that now they don't need us much relative to '67 or '73. Here are a couple of links, complete with some degree of ax-grinding, that provides a fascinating comparison of the Timeline of the Land, from the Arab and Jewish POV's:
http://www.mideastweb.org/timeline.htm
http://www.palestine-net.com/history/bhist.html
The sequential descriptions, choices of events, etc are very interesting to compare & contrast. You decide which strikes you as most relevant and honest - especially when describing itself in not-so-perfect light... <G>

In short, I really don't think they need much support from us. If anything, we could stand to learn a thing or two from them.

I understand. When I saw the improvements they had made to the radar of the F-4 Phantom & later heard about F-15 Eagle - serious improvements (range, tracking, sensitivity, active field of view, etc.) I started worrying about US, instead, cuz our AF leadership was stupid and arrogant enough to pooh-pooh what was obvious sophisticatication and talent. Humbled me enough to never dismiss them again. Conversely, when the US initiated Gulf Shield and AF crews came to S.A. - they tell hilarious stories about how GLAD the Saudi pilots were to see these US techs. Why, you ask? Because the Saudi maint techs had acquired a serious case of "insh'Allah" (if God wills it) regards electrical and mechanical maintenance of the Top of the Line F-15's they had in stock. Even now, Saudi pilots don't venture more than a few miles from the bases - and they (F-15's, 16's, Tornados, even saw a few Buchaneers) fly over Aramco everyday. So I have the polar opposite impression of the Arab use of military technology - and this jibes perfectly with what I see of the non-Mil tech, too.

But I don't personally like the idea of us having so many troops stationed permanently outside of US borders in places like SA. Fuck the Saoodis. At this point, I'm willing to say fuck the Egyptians and fuck the Kuwaitis as well, until those two countries' leadership can ensure that they can rein in their own populace.

While Egypt's president is constantly in full-suck mode on Uncle Sam's nether regions, his citizenry hates us, hates our involvement in the ME, hates our military presence and frankly I agree with them on that note.

Hmmmm. I'm wondering if you feel / felt same way about US troops stationed in more civilized / modern locales - Germany, Japan, Korea, et al? If so, okay, I can dig it. We DO have too many in "pre-positioned readiness" if we don't intend to attack or have intel that we will soon need to defend or have more than needed to maintain facilities. Funny thing is, being stationed outside of the US is quite popular with the troops - even the ones stationed in the remote sandy reaches aren't wildly unhappy. There are bennies and there are career payoffs for being in the "hardship" posts. Almost everyone in US Mil uniform, today, sees himself / herself as career... makes sense in all-vol force, right? So you'd find a funny response from those on whose behalf you're arguing.

Kuwait? They LOVE us. But as demonstrated by recent events, there are some pretty real dissenters there as well, and while their gov't has pooh-poohed this attack on US troops there as bad, the citizenry has declared the moron a "martyr" and are prancing around, calling for "death to America". Apparently they liked the Iraqis plundering their oilfields, hanging men and women from light poles in their cities and stealing their property. Perhaps we should remove our military presence from Kuwait and tell Iraq "I guess Kuwait doesn't like us helping them keep you guys out after all. Do as you please."

The Sabahs, Kuwaiti Royals - yes, indeed, the love us. Avg Kuwaiti on the street, nope, not at all. They love Osama. Bizarre? Maybe - we did toss out Saddam, but the main beneficiary was the Sabah family after it was over. The Kuwaitis are really a strange bunch. Over here is S.A., the joke is that the Kuwaitis try to "out-Saudi" the Saudis. No matter what the Saudi behavior, it seems the Kuwaitis try to take it up a notch. I think they are far less sophisticated than the Saudis, if you can believe that! They are, how shall I put it, an Arab's Arab. Does that work for you?

I was only mildly surprised by last night's news report regards the 2 twits who decided to attack Marines holding an exercise on F<mumble> Island just off the Kuwaiti shore. I dunno if they actually KNEW that the vast majority of the 1000 Marines were dry (using blanks or nothing), but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't. "Two Twits in a Toyota Take on Task Force" - reach Paradise. I only wish it had been a Live-Fire exercise and no Marine had been scratched, much less killed by such a pathetic pair.

Same with the Saudi's.

Our Mil Planners, those poor guys who have to create and constantly update war plans so the Mil Leadership can look good to the Pol's. Think about the Pol's... You know this is true: A know-nothing parasite will second-guess and crucify anyone / anytime (in the Military) who can't immediately respond to any Congressional dingbat with a wide array of choices of response for any lame threat dreamed up by said drugstore cowboy legislator. True, no? Biggest bunch of hypocrites we have in the US, I guess.

Well, in order to come up with credible and practicable scenarios and responses, you gotta have forward basing. Gotta. Have it. So S.A., where we spent millions of our own, and their, money to create ready to rock state of the art staging, supply, and launch facilities, well it is deemed a top priority to keep relations as good as needed to have access. Of course, this is subject to changing winds and climates and opinions, so the poor Planner is busier than you or I can imagine. Whether S.A., Bahrain (there's a story here, too - rioting in the streets, etc.), Qattar (pronounced "gutter", no matter what else you may hear <G>), UAE (very inconsistent friends), Turkey (preoccupied with the Kurds, for foolish reasons), Jordan (!!! on the sly, doncha know !!!), of course available but politically unusable Israel - the Planning Staff has to keep it all up to date in a constant rotation.

They certainly are a mixed bag. Many of them depend upon the biz that comes from the US presence, civilian and Mil alike. The man on the street, however, is not much different from the Kuwaiti. He hears what he is to believe this week every Friday. He kinda takes it to heart, but won't act on it until led to do so. The funny thing is how personal contact is different. The guys I know from shopping at the Supermarket or buying gas all "love" me. They are happy to see me, know I treat them with more respect that most Saudis, know I tip better than most expats, and know that I recognize the value of what they do and the service they provide. I don't bitch about what they don't have or can't do, I thank them for what they do have or the service they do provide. So in a one-on-one exchange, I know I'm as welcome as an infidel can expect to be. Now, a test : Would any of these guys offer to hide me or protect me if the mobs came out of their hovels hungry for infidel blood? Beats the fuck outta me. First blush guess is no fucking way. They don't stand up to each other in defense of themselves, so it would be foolish to think they would for me. That I probably would for them, if the situation was reversed and this was situated in the US, isn't the same thing. Mainly because I could, in just one or two sentences, REASON with a crowd in the US - they would listen because I stood up to them. If I ran away, they'd slaughter these guys, just as I could probably expect to be overrun here. So I keep my hickory axe handle in the car and hope I'll get 5-6 good swings in should it ever come to that.

Something tells me that Iraq probably wouldn't be a bother to us if we basically exited the region and let Saddam's neighbors deal with him. Like we have both said, we're damned if we do something, we're damned if we don't... but if I have to be damned, I'd rather take the road that makes us fewer long-term enemies, costs fewer American lives -- civilian AND military --- and doesn't involve messy, expensive, almost-always-futile endeavors like "nation building", and leaves us as a high-road noninterventionist free society that welcomes developing nations as they "get it" (like we were discussing with Iran, above).

I'd agree, except we're talking about Arabs. They WON'T do anything about him. He plays lightening rod for them. The others all look pretty good to us, relatively speaking, when he's in the lineup, wouldn't you say? He's the only active ingredient, except for Iran, in the whole region. Syria's Assad, the old man, not the kid, was almost up to it. Saddam's got the only pair in those parts and, sadly, they're reserved for executing some insane private vision of his glory. He is, truly, one of the classic psychopaths to "lead" a country.

Otherwise, I understand your logic and have to agree. I would love to be on the high-road from here on out. The number of times we've found ourselves embracing an expedient decision - as opposed to a principled one - and having to eat our own words or live it down somehow really galls me. You, as a nation, can behave ethically and honorably for a century - and then some total jackass can wipe that out from an obscure post in State or the CIA or wherever in one moment with an injudicious unchecked expedient choice. That chaps my ass, believe me. No need to point out what the world remembers, eh? Nation-building is a farcical mis-nomer, don't you think? Classic "you can lead him to water, but you can't make him drink" mistake. Westerners always ALWAYS make the mistake of thinking that everyone out THER is just like us - only they talk funny. They DO talk funny, but they are NOT just like us. If the Iraqis aren't serious enough to throw Saddam off, just as the famed Afghan (For Sale!) Fighter was unwilling to face the Taliban except in a far Northern Enclave, what makes us think they deserve a shot at a Nation? What in the world makes us think they will throw off 4000 yrs of single-man leadership, whether a Monarchy or, as is the case with Iraq, a Cult of Personality? Not likely to work. I KNOW they are far more modern than the Afghanis, or were a decade ago before the Sanctions began, but I have serious doubts that this is more than just more pearls before swine. You're right - not until they "get it" will it make any difference.

So... how's about we get the Mississippi Nat'l Guard together, have 'em draw weapons, and buy a Carnival Tours Group Excursion Pkg and go take the Mo Fo For Our Own Selves? The local can think they work for us, as this is the limit of their experience, but we'll set it up as an Employee-Owned company. Since we understand that:

All Things Flow From The Reward Model.
Example 1) If you want a bunch of sycophantic ass-kissing despotic nespotistic shitheads, like the Saudis apparently do, then THAT is what you reward.
Example 2) If you want get-the-job-done, work-hard / play-hard, team-oriented, customer-focused, professionals, then THAT is what you reward.

Slowly, we will teach them a new way. Slowly they will get it. Over time, when there is a team that DOES get it, we will use them to seed NEW teams. They won't know it, but their stock dividends are accumulating in their personal Arabic 401K fund. When they have a serious grasp of how it all works, and wonder if they'll ever get the benefit pkg that goes with this model, we reveal the fact that it's already there, running, and they can be quite certain they'll be able to send their children to college, etc.

<wakes up from dream> Nawww, it'll never happen, but it would be cool if it was possible...

And if they never "get it", fuck 'em. Let them deal. If they threaten us, we destroy them, swiftly, decisively, overwhelmingly, and we end it there, and ensure they never are a threat again (thank you, Orson Scott Card). We knock them down, and then we kick them repeatedly in the face until they no longer get up. Period.

The Big Stick comes Out Of The Closet. 100% agreement. And, if we are 100% honest every step of the way, we do not need to apologize to anyone. As some song I recall says: "Keep all the food lines moving, don't come crying for more, the signs were there you should've bought connections before."

My single rule for raising my daughter was this: The default answer is Yes. If it is No, I will explain why in whatever language is required for you to understand, but brook no argument. Period.

This worked like a fucking champ - she was an awesome kid and we had a total blast. I was sure that being a Single Father must be, somehow, illegal - cuz it was so much fun. She turned out to be a great person, all credit to her. I based my parental model on one idea: They start out perfect. They BECOME fucked up. I am quite proud of the fact that I was aware enough to minimize how much I fucked her up. She thinks for herself, is nobody's fool, ignores anyone who tries to control her with approval / disapproval games - in effect, she is NOT a tool. She's cool.

And we continue to do that to anyone -- and I mean ANYONE -- in the world who decides they want to take arms against our country, or arms against our citizens abroad.

Sudan is harboring people who helped plot the World Trade Center/Pentagon attacks? Then we will remove Sudan. Yemen is harboring people that are involved in financing Al Qaeda? Then we will remove Yemen.

As yet, however, nobody has been able to demonstrate anything of the kind with Iraq... so we leave Saddam alone unless he makes a mistake that justifies our removing his country from the world map.

By "remove", I mean we destroy them militarily, utterly removing every single piece of their government with flying lead and overwhelming force and we install a government that will guarantee us that it will not happen again, at their own similar peril if it does. It's amazing how much control a strong leader can exert over his people when his own life is going to be cut short by a smart bomb if he doesn't play ball.

I agree with the methodology. We have to play high-road hardball. The Big Kicker is: we need premium intelligence - unfiltered and unspun. We pretty much know who WE can trust. We need to start demonstrating, by example of our word being kept, that we can BE trusted. We have to develop sources everywhere and continue to aggressively pursue technology. I believe that humint is as valuable as elint; it depends upon each situation encountered which will deliver what is needed to support decision-making.

I wonder if anyone who makes decisions in our Govt ever looks or listens to what avg Joes like us have to say...

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #66 on:** October 11, 2002, 07:11:37 AM »

Quote from: Chris

I believe we already do have a reason to take him out. Saddam violated one of the terms that he agreed to after his first ass pounding in the Gulf War. He agreed that he would no longer have weapons of mass destruction within his control.

Because he violated that, we have the right to oust him from his position.

[/b]

You're absolutely correct. UN Resolutions / Security Council Resolutions do not expire unless that is expressly written into them. He has breached more than one, but it only takes one to "authorize" any UN signatory to seek compliance by force.

Why Geo #43 allowed himself to be roped into dealing with the UN, I do not know. He did not need to. Period. The Euros, whining their asses off about the arrogance of the US doing anything unilaterally, was actually a pretty fine show, all by itself. Of course, the most outspoken were those who have major monetary stakes in Saddam's regime remaining in power (Russia, France, Germany) and, of course, Shroeder, the prissy little fuck, was playing local politics getting himself reelected. The between the lines story is that he has sent multiple people to the Bushy Boyz Admin seeking forgiveness, "It was nothing personal, George, only business..." I hope they brought kneepads with them.

Blix, the Chief UN Weapons Inspector has been pretty visible lately, pretending to make decisions regards Iraq and when the Inspectors would go and under what conditions. Bullshit. He is a mere functionary and has Zero decision-making authority. When he was in front of the cameras, he was putting Germany in an ever-deepening hole - especially with the US & UK. As permanent members of the Sec Council, they can override him - and ANYTHING GERMANY EVER WANTS FROM THE UN AGAIN - IN PERPETUITY. I thought, given the hole that Shroeder was already in, that this was an excellent subplot and a classic case of fucking up bigtime. It will take more than a few trips to the woodshed before Germany gets any goodwill votes from the US. I think they figured it out when Colin Powell dropped by and met with Blix. You may recall that last press conference in which Blix's tune, standing there next to Powell and not center-stage, suddenly changed regards when and under what rules inspectors would return to Iraq.

There WAS a decent argument to the effect that Geo #43 needed Congressional approval. Now, with both houses of Congress authorizing Geo to do his thing, that is covered. No more hoops are actually required.

They will still give France and Russia a shot, but Fuck the UN. Fuck the lot of 'em. And Fuck Saddam. Funny side note on the French Supertanker in Yemen. The first word after actual inspection of the damage is that it looks like it WAS a terrorist attack. I wonder if France will still try to play games with the US, now that THEY have been attacked. Funny shit, IMHO, given what hypocrites they are regards almost everything that comes before the UN.

Our Snaq in Iraq, or perhaps the Baghdad Boogaloo, has a launch window of Dec 15 - Feb 1. Wanna run a betting pool on which day? I'll take 3 or 4, just for the helluvit!

Quote from: Chris

Edit: Oh, and for the session time out thingie, I believe it is good for one hour. I am going to change that right now to prevent that from happening again. I didn't think that someone would take over an hour to type something up.

[/b]

Thanx!

You could make that 3-4 hours - and there would probably never be an occurrence of someone having their identity hijacked, but you'll save an untold number of lost session posts - believe me. I often spend 3 hours on ONE response. No shit. I'm not dense, I actually write fast, but I also edit the hell out of everything and try to doc it, if needed, so I look a lot of shit up (google searches, etc.) in real-time. That all takes time to do, read, mix into the response, etc. Sorry, but that IS how I use this venue!

I appreciate your response - not to mention your site! Thanx!

Demosthenes · « **Reply #67 on:** October 11, 2002, 10:01:13 AM »

We agree then as Iraq and Palestine are #'s 2 & 3 on my Task Order - only the Terrorism threats, Al-Qaeda being the most well-known, deserve immediate and unconditional response - whenever and wherever no matter whose turf -- Hear that, Germany? Afghanistan is becoming the same old factional warlord quagmire it has been for the last x00 years. It seems they are incapable of learning any new tricks and doing it "right" (i.e. having a real nation, instead of the same-old, same-old) is beyond them. Kharzai strikes me as a fashion horse, as opposed to a Pres. He is already complaining that we haven't solved everything and their disorganized chaos is, somehow, a failing of the West. I think we should pull our Special Forces Presidential Guard off him and see if that makes him feel a bit less strident and act less grandiose. He is the leader of a Rock Garden. He expects us to turn it into a Paradise that never before existed. He can't even command the respect of enough people to maintain the capital Kabul, without big-time military back up and constant presence. Afghanistan is, by any measure, a minor victory evolving (reverting) into a major failure.

I agree 100%. We removed most of the visible "teeth" in this critter, but we left the goddamn thing alive and with a brood of younguns to raise. It'll be back unless they get a real tough guy to take charge (read: a militant dictator type like what Pakistan has).

On the subject of Pakistan, for that matter, we find ourselves currently in the unfortunate position of having to support a militant dictator who took over his country via a violent coup, dissolved the country's parliament, and is having phony-baloney "elections" to make it looks like he gives a damn (even though he still retains the power to override anything this new parliament puts in place, and he still reserves the ability to dissolve this one too... some democracy). And the stupid thing is, I don't see any alternative for us in Pakistan BUT to support this asshat... if his regime topples, suddenly we have an entire nation of Islamic extremists that have nuclear weapons. Granted, they're short range nukes, but ask India if they're even remotely comforted by that fact... or our State Department, for that matter. Feh.

Agreed. The House just voted and cleared the way for Bushie's Excellent Adventure. Expect it in Mid-Dec to Mid-Jan timeframe. I expect to be out of S.A., one way of the other, by 1st week of Feb, if not sooner.

That's about the timetable I'm thinking. That will be enough time for the Bush 43 spin machine to have probably bullied some assholes into supporting this (i.e., France, Germany, and a reluctant Russia... yes, I do see them caving eventually, if Bushie and Powell work them enough) too. Plus, if I know anything about military readiness (and I like to think I do, at least

), they aren't going to do anything half-assed. They are going to do a massive buildup in probably two or three key locations, and then hit hard, and most importantly FAST, knocking down communications, anti-aircraft defenses, and taking steps to blow up bridges that have been built since the '91 incursion. Heh. It must really suxx0r to be a civil engineer working in Iraq...

All of Arabia, and most everyone else as well, thinks Israel is our lap dog. Ha - some lap dog! This li'l fucker can bite! Israeli leadership has exactly the same responsibilities to its public as any other democratic Gov't. The protection of its citizens is and must be first and foremost. They will do this as they determine is best (i.e. we cannot dictate THEIR Foreign Policy and then bitch about others dictating OURS) - and that may or may not coincide with what we want from them.

Good assessment, IMO. I've been saying that for years, particularly while we were bombing the snot out of Al Qaeda positions in Tora Bora, while at the same time shaking an angry finger at Sharon for slapping around some school and bus bombing cowards in Gaza. Whatever.

BTW, regards the Khobar Towers incident, which is what you were referring to as the barracks, I believe[...]

Yup. Dat's de one....

They are the one Govt entity I can think of that, when they say they are gonna do something, well you can take it to the bank and cash it - whether you happen to like it, or not. That certainly gets my attention! You're undoubtedly right, too, that now they don't need us much relative to '67 or '73. Here are a couple of links, complete with some degree of ax-grinding, that provides a fascinating comparison of the Timeline of the Land, from the Arab and Jewish POV's:
http://www.mideastweb.org/timeline.htm
http://www.palestine-net.com/history/bhist.html

I'll check those out when I get the chance. That's always an interesting activity, comparing two versions of the same events.... it's sort of like reading some of the "men who killed Kennedy" conspiracy books, and then reading "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner.

I don't know if you've read Posner's book on the JFK assassination or not, but if not, suffice it to say that his opinion of the Warren Commission report/investigation could also be summed up as that "never assume malicious intent when gross incompetence will suffice" quote as well. In other words, just because there were some fuckups and inconsistencies in the investigation does not a conspiracy make. You and I BOTH know from our own experience that the US government (in particular when you are crossing multiple agencies) is far too incompetent to ever contain any kind of conspiracy of that size and magnitude for more than about thirty seconds before severely fucking something up.

Hmmmm. I'm wondering if you feel / felt same way about US troops stationed in more civilized / modern locales - Germany, Japan, Korea, et al? If so, okay, I can dig it. We DO have too many in "pre-positioned readiness" if we don't intend to attack or have intel that we will soon need to defend or have more than needed to maintain facilities. Funny thing is, being stationed outside of the US is quite popular with the troops - even the ones stationed in the remote sandy reaches aren't wildly unhappy. There are bennies and there are career payoffs for being in the "hardship" posts. Almost everyone in US Mil uniform, today, sees himself / herself as career... makes sense in all-vol force, right? So you'd find a funny response from those on whose behalf you're arguing.

I do feel that way regarding our troops in Korea, Japan, and Germany, et al. Not even so much "on the behalf of" our troops there... I was in the US Navy; I know how good a duty station foreign deployment can be from a soldier's POV.

I'm instead arguing it from the stance of "I dislike deploying our resources to guard the borders of other peoples' countries". Plain and simple. Let's pay attention to guarding our own country, and I mean that in the most literal sense. It's expensive to keep troops more-or-less permanently housed, fed, clothed, and at-the-ready outside of our country, essentially just to make Joe German and Ken Korean feel secure in their borders. Fuck that. Bring them home, use part of what we get back for our closer-to-home defense, disband the rest and save John Q. Taxpayer a few billion dollars.

Now don't take that to mean that I am not in favour of having a strong military. I mean to keep that Big Stick™ handy and ready to swing, but we simply don't NEED to keep it up in the air, already in mid-swing, because frankly, I think our arm is getting bloody tired of holding it up there on a permanent basis. As a former company commander in basic training used to say (when he'd make somebody take a pencil out and hold it between two fingers straight out in front of them), "that one ounce pencil will get pretty goddamned heavy after you've been holding it up for an hour, recruit!".

The Sabahs, Kuwaiti Royals - yes, indeed, the love us. Avg Kuwaiti on the street, nope, not at all. They love Osama. Bizarre? Maybe - we did toss out Saddam, but the main beneficiary was the Sabah family after it was over. The Kuwaitis are really a strange bunch. Over here is S.A., the joke is that the Kuwaitis try to "out-Saudi" the Saudis. No matter what the Saudi behavior, it seems the Kuwaitis try to take it up a notch. I think they are far less sophisticated than the Saudis, if you can believe that! They are, how shall I put it, an Arab's Arab. Does that work for you?

That's utterly appalling, and, unfortunately, pretty much what I already suspected. As I said above, "fuck 'em".

I was only mildly surprised by last night's news report regards the 2 twits who decided to attack Marines holding an exercise on F<mumble> Island just off the Kuwaiti shore. I dunno if they actually KNEW that the vast majority of the 1000 Marines were dry (using blanks or nothing), but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't. "Two Twits in a Toyota Take on Task Force" - reach Paradise. I only wish it had been a Live-Fire exercise and no Marine had been scratched, much less killed by such a pathetic pair.

Agreed. Hopefully they didn't manage to reproduce before removing themselves from the gene pool. If only we could convince the rest of them to just start killing each other instead of us...

But then, that's part of my point in removing our involvement from the region. With no hated Westerners to attack, they'll just revert to their bickering amongst themselves, hopefully with lots and lots of casualties.

Our Mil Planners, those poor guys who have to create and constantly update war plans so the Mil Leadership can look good to the Pol's. Think about the Pol's... You know this is true: A know-nothing parasite will second-guess and crucify anyone / anytime (in the Military) who can't immediately respond to any Congressional dingbat with a wide array of choices of response for any lame threat dreamed up by said drugstore cowboy legislator. True, no? Biggest bunch of hypocrites we have in the US, I guess.

That's a big part of the problem, true.

So I keep my hickory axe handle in the car and hope I'll get 5-6 good swings in should it ever come to that.

Lol. Hopefully it never does. But if so, make sure you get at least one or two of them into a state where they can't be identified easily. Hickory plus Face = Hilarity!

I'd agree, except we're talking about Arabs. They WON'T do anything about him.

I don't really care. Let him invade his neighbors, lob scuds over the borders, kill what remains of his "friends" in the region. Let them all get up in arms over him, and let them fight. It doesn't honestly matter WHO wins over there, or if there even ever IS a "winner". My point is that our presence over there polarizes almost all of them into hating one common foe. The vaccuum left by our noninterventionism over there would lead to them falling apart and all fighting each other, which I think you and I both agree would be nothing but beneficial for the rest of the world. If they ever DO sort anything out and stop fighting, whatever's left will be willing to listen to our force if we decide to wield it there. But as it is, our force there is like swinging a baseball bat at a swarm of gnats. Sure, we occasionally hit one or two, but the overall effect is somewhat less than intimidating as a whole...

I agree with the methodology. We have to play high-road hardball. The Big Kicker is: we need premium intelligence - unfiltered and unspun. We pretty much know who WE can trust. We need to start demonstrating, by example of our word being kept, that we can BE trusted. We have to develop sources everywhere and continue to aggressively pursue technology. I believe that humint is as valuable as elint; it depends upon each situation encountered which will deliver what is needed to support decision-making.

Hah. That'll be the day. I wonder if Colin Powell were president if we could actually start down such a path. My guts (and I have learned to trust my guts, usually) tell me that he would, if he could ever be convinced to run. Which my guts also tell me he couldn't. Oh well. We can always hope, right?

I wonder if anyone who makes decisions in our Govt ever looks or listens to what avg Joes like us have to say...

No. And that's a pretty big part of the problem. The other part is that too many average Joes keep voting idiots into office that DON'T listen to what we have to say. It's because most average Joes are idiots themselves, methinks.

I hold up the subject of my "drivers test" post on HN yesterday as my example.

Anonymous · « **Reply #68 on:** October 11, 2002, 01:46:43 PM »

Holly fuck! Are you guys trying to write a novel???

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #69 on:** October 12, 2002, 02:29:48 AM »

Quote from: TheJudge

Holly fuck! Are you guys trying to write a novel???

Well, yes... Didn't you get the memo?

Chris, you really do need to work on getting the distributions lists up to date, I mean Sheesh, man! As GTG Admin you're getting a full 10% cut - and then there's the other 10% you're pulling down as our Agent... Buck it up man and do your part!

Sorry, Judge. We're almost done, just working on the Prologue and jacket cover material. The title is:

Nine Steps to Nirvava / Paradise / Heaven / Whateverthefuckyouwannacallit

Example Chapters:
1. World Hunger
This issue was easily solved by arranging a simple contract with
Taco Bell, Wendy's, McDonald's, Burger Doodle, er, King, and KFC.
The funding came from dissolving the UN. The savings from the
Management Office Supplies and Travel Budget ALONE paid for
the entire program. No more starving or homeless children -
anywhere. The numbers work - check it out!
...

4. World Peace
We dissolve all Political Parties, which results in an amazing
available workforce, reduction of tense strident debate and, since
every sycophant who has ever contributed to a Political campaign
is required to contribute the same to our budget, in perpetuity,
we have one hell of a capital budget. For starters we will rebuild
Palestine, Afghanistan, and East St Louis. We will buy every
media outlet on the Planet and hold the franchise rights to any
future outlets - a total monopoly. Rupert Murdoch's Media Empire,
for example: after we subtract all of his over and under the table
political outlays, it's a wash - we get the whole thing for zero $.
Not Bad, eh? It was even better for acquiring CNN - they had to
pay US to take it. So we still have money to burn. We will burn
some of it on our new Patented TV Hypnosis and Subliminal
Suggestion System - a 100% effective means of telling everyone
to fucking cool it, chill, take five... Those who try to duck or avoid
us will be given massive migraines for a full year and then suffer
a massive 100% fatal heart attack. Our insider joke is that this is:
Scanners - The Good Guys Win.
...

9. World Mental Health
We dissolve all organized Religions and seize all of their assets.
This is, by far, the most lucrative and productive step in the entire
Program. We filled the vacuum left by this pap with Free Cable TV for
everyone on the Planet - and featured the Animal Planet, Discovery
Science, and The Learning Channel. Test market studies have all
confirmed what our best thinkers predicted: There will BE no more
mental health issues - as soon as we complete the DeProgramming
Phase to remove Guilt and the Fear of Death / Love of Death idiocy
implanted by the majority of these corrupt, brutal, and dehumanizing
regimes. One major economic boon comes from the fact that people
no longer squander their incomes contributing or tithing (blatant
psycho-robbery) to these insane / inane former institutions. Average
disposable income will rise by a full 10% - and our surveys indicate
a large rise in the number of working-class families who would now
plan to send one or more children to College or Trades Schools.

All in all, a good time has been had by all involved. I particularly enjoyed the Italian Sausage pizza we had during that last weekend session.

Sorry you missed it!

KoRNexpressor · « **Reply #70 on:** October 12, 2002, 07:52:04 AM »

Quote

Holy FUCK! Are you guys trying to write a novel?!

YEah. Not to sound spammy, but that is a lot of writing!! I never thought so much involvment could go to one post.

Demosthenes · « **Reply #71 on:** October 12, 2002, 01:22:11 PM »

Quote from: KoRNexpressor

Quote
Holy FUCK! Are you guys trying to write a novel?!

YEah. Not to sound spammy, but that is a lot of writing!! I never thought so much involvment could go to one post.

It's called "rational thought". Try it some time.

Paco DeGaillo · « **Reply #72 on:** October 13, 2002, 12:00:37 AM »

Quote from: Demosthenes

I agree 100%. We removed most of the visible "teeth" in this critter, but we left the goddamn thing alive and with a brood of younguns to raise. It'll be back unless they get a real tough guy to take charge (read: a militant dictator type like what Pakistan has).

[/b]

Y'know, I've been looking at this Iraq thing long and hard - trying to separate out my pro/con arguments and drop them into various buckets (emotional, political, intellectual, etc.) and then reevaluate... Since geo43 IS going to do it, barring something truly extraordinary...

<fantasyflash>
Hypothetical Example News Flashes:

French Arabs - 6% of the pop, declares jihad on the US - Chirac
agrees to drag other 94% along since one of his mistresses
emigrated from Lebanon as a child - the source of one of his
favourite fanatasies;
...
Germany, supercharged into Nationalistic fervor by Wagner
Skinhead Festival, goes Gothic and joins on provision that
US press will be destroyed for making fun of Shroeder's dyed
hair - and exposing German commercial complicity in Iraq's
Chemical and Biological WMD programs;
...
Italy goes to long lunch and, during hommus course at La Arabia
Fantastique, decides to add their 2 cents when the wine runs out
and they face eventually returning to work sober;
...
Vatican see opportunity to distance itself from renegade US Church
which insists that Pedophilia isn't really a "healthy tradition" as
claimed by Vatican insider memos;
...
Russia, wanting desperately to be "European" agrees to join on
the condition they get Alaska back;
...
Summary - no one is actually voting on issue of IRAQ - that's just the chip in play...
</fantasyflash>

I figured I might as well play it out and see whassup in the "Guess Your Weight" Carnival of GeoPolitical Shenanigans. In the purely political bucket, it will be a very VERY interesting experiment in promotion of democracy - and destabilization of totalitarian regimes, at least all of those that can see themselves in the same place as the Iraqis. This will include the other 21 Arab "countries" - at least as defined by the Brits over tea one lazy afternoon near the end of WW-II. I believe, and mentally picture, the Arab World like a woven hammock. I am convinced that if you undo the outtermost knot - the rest come unraveled by themselves in turn if under tension. It would be very interesting, indeed, to see the effect the democratization of Iraq has on the rest. I found a small amount of satisfaction when Powell talked about the Post-War Iraq rehabilitation schemes under consideration - and specified the Marshall Plan and Occupation of Japan as models at the top of the list - though "nothing has been selected" yet.

On the subject of Pakistan, for that matter, we find ourselves currently in the unfortunate position of having to support a militant dictator who took over his country via a violent coup, dissolved the country's parliament, and is having phony-baloney "elections" to make it looks like he gives a damn (even though he still retains the power to override anything this new parliament puts in place, and he still reserves the ability to dissolve this one too... some democracy). And the stupid thing is, I don't see any alternative for us in Pakistan BUT to support this asshat... if his regime topples, suddenly we have an entire nation of Islamic extremists that have nuclear weapons. Granted, they're short range nukes, but ask India if they're even remotely comforted by that fact... or our State Department, for that matter. Feh.

Looks like the Euro Election Watchers were not impressed and called the voting process "flawed" - diplomatic-speak for "stolen" outright, I guess. It IS one of the more bizarre situations we've found ourselves in for some time. He IS a dictator, but hasn't looted the bank, I think he just likes the power. He hasn't really done all that much about corruption, but the Euro intellectuals say he has no choice - all of the pool of potential qualified administrators are corrupt - is this a constant PakIndiLaysian condition? In areas of particular US interest he has been stalwart and as good as his word (Daniel Perl investigation, rounding up people we want on Terrorist List, etc.). If he were only as conscientious regards his own people. Sigh. I was one who thought the Pak-Indi confrontation a few months ago was hysterically funny. The shrill stridency these two entities have toward each other merely underlines the fact that there isn't spit's difference between them. Only the idiocy of religion. Otherwise they're indistinguishable, hence the vehemence of their antipathy. I was expecting there to be 2 smoking holes when it climaxed. Instead, it was just the traditional high-volume, but low spark of a couple of high-heeled boys...

Agreed. The House just voted and cleared the way for Bushie's Excellent Adventure. Expect it in Mid-Dec to Mid-Jan timeframe. I expect to be out of S.A., one way of the other, by 1st week of Feb, if not sooner.

That's about the timetable I'm thinking. That will be enough time for the Bush 43 spin machine to have probably bullied some assholes into supporting this (i.e., France, Germany, and a reluctant Russia... yes, I do see them caving eventually, if Bushie and Powell work them enough) too. Plus, if I know anything about military readiness (and I like to think I do, at least ), they aren't going to do anything half-assed. They are going to do a massive buildup in probably two or three key locations, and then hit hard, and most importantly FAST, knocking down communications, anti-aircraft defenses, and taking steps to blow up bridges that have been built since the '91 incursion. Heh. It must really suxx0r to be a civil engineer working in Iraq...

Well, if they agree or not, he's going, I think. He ALREADY has the UN mandate from the '92 Cease Fire. He is covered, whether the UN weeners like it or not. They should be more prescient and careful in their language when writing resolutions if they want to actually limit how these things play out over time! The joke in S.A. is that Bahrain is dangerously close to flipping over, like an air mattress in a pool, cuz the US is stacking so much ordinance down in the SW corner of the island. I agree it will be a blitzkreig - one that would even astonish Hitler.

One good thing I can see about the actuall Mil attack will be that, for ONCE in my lifetime, State will not be standing there wringing their hands and opposing the Joint Chiefs every step of the way moaning about giving negotiations another chance - our historical norm. I believe that it had its place, once upon a time, but no more. You cannot be a "little bit pregnant" with today's weaponry and tactics. Everything is integrated and interdependent, thus it must occur as planned to preclude casualties. I do like and appreciate the changes that have occurred in MilThink since the Viet Nam era - now they try a helluvalot harder to minimize casualties - not leaving that issue to each Company or Battalian commander. Remember the bad old days when some goof wearing Eagles could wander around the sky, safe in his "mobile command post", and repeatedly demand that troopers far below "take that hill" - only to abandon it once taken.

Regards Iraqi Civil Engrs - talk about job security!

But I don't really mean that. The "plan" info that has come my way is quite different from what I've heard in the press - and any previous US campaign. This time the focus is strictly on Saddam, his home village / city of Tikrete, his direct-report "council" / bodyguards, and the Republicn Guard Divisions. What I've heard is that this will be a blitzkreig beheading. All told in initial strike: approx 48 hrs. Then short "cooling" period of about 24 hrs - in which the only air traffic will be Wild Weasels (to take out any remaining anti-air assets) and Psy-Ops (dropping leaflets telling everyone that Saddam has been removed from power - he is running nothing other than his skinny-assed legs trying to get away). Then, in a combo-inside-out invasion: Southward sweep from Northern Kurdish territory and Northward sweep from Southern Shi'a territory around Basra to create classic pincer - PLUS heavy para-drops in and around Baghdad to augment those SF guys that were dropped to take out Tikrete and do target designation in targeting Sadda, the Council, and reduction of Guard Leadership. The Iraqi Man On The Street will be informed that he is free and alive - and will stay that way if he doesn't pick up arms from the dead. A few will, of course - every "civilization" has its share of hair-shirt fools, but most will not. They will wait it out for the 3-5 days it takes for the "invading" troops to take up positions and dig in and complete the clean-up of the identified Saddam forces already specified as targets. If you weren't a target in the initial attacks, so goes the leaflet message, you are not now. If you like it that way, be cool and hang on. If you want to die on the spot, pick that AK-47 you see lying next to the headless Iraqi Ba'ath Party official.

They are the one Govt entity I can think of that, when they say they are gonna do something, well you can take it to the bank and cash it - whether you happen to like it, or not. That certainly gets my attention! You're undoubtedly right, too, that now they don't need us much relative to '67 or '73. Here are a couple of links, complete with some degree of ax-grinding, that provides a fascinating comparison of the Timeline of the Land, from the Arab and Jewish POV's:
http://www.mideastweb.org/timeline.htm
http://www.palestine-net.com/history/bhist.html

I'll check those out when I get the chance. That's always an interesting activity, comparing two versions of the same events.... it's sort of like reading some of the "men who killed Kennedy" conspiracy books, and then reading "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner.

I don't know if you've read Posner's book on the JFK assassination or not, but if not, suffice it to say that his opinion of the Warren Commission report/investigation could also be summed up as that "never assume malicious intent when gross incompetence will suffice" quote as well. In other words, just because there were some fuckups and inconsistencies in the investigation does not a conspiracy make. You and I BOTH know from our own experience that the US government (in particular when you are crossing multiple agencies) is far too incompetent to ever contain any kind of conspiracy of that size and magnitude for more than about thirty seconds before severely fucking something up.

I know Posner by reputation - he has done a bunch of Talk Shows on the topic, right? I agree that the Warren Comm report is full of holes and incompetence - and is the main cause for all of the conspiracy shit that has arisen. Had they been even semi-competent and semi-thorough, there wouldn't have been much left to argue about. But nooooooo. They fucked it up big-time, allowed the Sec Svc & FBI to play all sorts of ass-coverage games, and created the entire problem. 100% Agreement with you about secrecy (ha!) in most quarters - especially civilian... I have to assume that Civ Intel / Law Enfordement was even more naive and unwitting, regards secrecy and the need to conatin info, than the Mil guys - most of whom knew people could die when intel was compromised. Not that it would necessarily deter - you could get yourself free drinks for life with the right word here or there - that sort of thing - and not really come to grips with how often this was occurring and how devastating it could be on an investigation or to a "secret" project or mission. Sometimes, like the TV of the day, it's as if people were just one hell of a lot simpler-minded back then. Naive and foolish.

Hmmmm. I'm wondering if you feel / felt same way about US troops stationed in more civilized / modern locales - Germany, Japan, Korea, et al? If so, okay, I can dig it. We DO have too many in "pre-positioned readiness" if we don't intend to attack or have intel that we will soon need to defend or have more than needed to maintain facilities. Funny thing is, being stationed outside of the US is quite popular with the troops - even the ones stationed in the remote sandy reaches aren't wildly unhappy. There are bennies and there are career payoffs for being in the "hardship" posts. Almost everyone in US Mil uniform, today, sees himself / herself as career... makes sense in all-vol force, right? So you'd find a funny response from those on whose behalf you're arguing.

I do feel that way regarding our troops in Korea, Japan, and Germany, et al. Not even so much "on the behalf of" our troops there... I was in the US Navy; I know how good a duty station foreign deployment can be from a soldier's POV.

I'm instead arguing it from the stance of "I dislike deploying our resources to guard the borders of other peoples' countries". Plain and simple. Let's pay attention to guarding our own country, and I mean that in the most literal sense. It's expensive to keep troops more-or-less permanently housed, fed, clothed, and at-the-ready outside of our country, essentially just to make Joe German and Ken Korean feel secure in their borders. Fuck that. Bring them home, use part of what we get back for our closer-to-home defense, disband the rest and save John Q. Taxpayer a few billion dollars.

7th Fleet? Did you "do" Pattaya, Thailand? A "legendary" stop, I've heard from ex-Navy guys. <G> Sure looks different from my POV, I'm sure. This is the "raw" edge of Thailand, where the rubber met the, uh, er, road perhaps once or ten thousand times too often!

I agree with you on nixing the notion that we should be required to put our people in the ground in large number to protect the soil of an ally - who's perfectly capable of fielding an adequate force to defend itself, if a defense is actually required. I don't mind supplying trainers, liasons, and similar personnel. But I know what it was...
The real reason for stationing our troops all over was simple: we didn't trust giving our best tech arms to our allies. It would end up on the black market overnight. If that doesn't make you shake you head in exasperation, I duuno what will! <g> Sheesh, consider the implications!

So, if your national interest policy dictated that we needed to defend a line here and here and over there, well, then you needed to staff and arm US forces to defend those lines. One of my pet peeves is the "accounting game" played when the Mil calculates how much something costs, such as Gulf Storm. A LARGE % of the $ figure given is purest 100% USDA Bullshit. They account for the salaries of every man and woman, all of their bennies, maint costs, training costs, equip costs - the whole shooting match. In fact, they would've paid salaries, bennies, training, and most equip costs ANYWAY - these people didn't just materialize at the Assembly Area ready for transport OOC. Only in the areas of initial sea/air lift, mobile vehicle maintenance and heavier operating schedules, significant live ordinance vs. training rounds, eating in mobile / field circumstances vs. barracks (MRE's DO cost more than bulk-prepared hot meals in the home Company area, I'm sure), home barracks have ongoing maint and camp facilities are "perishable" and don't last all that long, once broken out and employed. In other words, only staging, live fire, and actual use of pre-purchased campaigning materiel are "new" expenses that would not have ensued otherwise. Can you say "bogus"? Hell, the Saudis thought it was funny how judicious the Pentagon / GAO / etc. were in compiling these numbers for "reimbursement" - when they had to pay WhatEver We Said - it was their ASSES on the line - and they knew it. I wonder what we charged them for the Mk-84 Iron Bombs Inventory, the majority of the air-ground ordinance used (smart weapons accounted for less than 10% of A-G expended), that were left over from WW-II, Korea, and Viet Nam? Wanna make a guess that the "value" ascribed to each device was in "present-day" cost of mfg (i.e. the "replacement" cost - though we had no intention of replacing any of the iron bombs!). Ivan Boesky, et al, were wimpy little Boy Scouts when compared to Pentagon accountants!

Now don't take that to mean that I am not in favour of having a strong military. I mean to keep that Big Stick(tm) handy and ready to swing, but we simply don't NEED to keep it up in the air, already in mid-swing, because frankly, I think our arm is getting bloody tired of holding it up there on a permanent basis. As a former company commander in basic training used to say (when he'd make somebody take a pencil out and hold it between two fingers straight out in front of them), "that one ounce pencil will get pretty goddamned heavy after you've been holding it up for an hour, recruit!".

Oh! I can feel it, too. As a proud member of the 3-hr "I am a Dying Cockroach" Club, I "get it" - and empathize. My infraction was a simple shoving-match - that got a little out of hand. Long stupid story resulting in 1 week in CC (Corrective Custody - classic Army euphemism) and much extracurricular Company & Battalian behavioral modification testing.

The costs are part 'n parcel with the paranoia policy that said we couldn't trust any of our allies with "the good stuff" - and I'm not talking about iron bombs, of course, but PaveTack, FLIR, Side-Scanning Radar, early implementations of the J-Stars concept (force integration & unified command fed real-time battlefield data), etc. We were the cutting-edge in many areas and didn't really feel comfortable just giving away the farm to people who owed us their freedom from Nazi's, et al, but didin't necessarily care. It's a different list of items and techs, today, but the same reasons and concerns. Sucks, yes, but what is best alternative? Regards training and field maint skills, parts, and facilities you have to pick all or none for an entire theater, such as Europe.

And speaking of Euro, for example, we DID want the battles to occur THERE - not HERE. We preferred to meet the Soviet Tanks in the Fulda Gap in Germay, rather than, say, the San Fernando Valley. I'm not making light of your arguments, just regurgitating stuff I remember from my daze in green. Long ago and far away.

I was only mildly surprised by last night's news report regards the 2 twits who decided to attack Marines holding an exercise on F<mumble> Island just off the Kuwaiti shore. I dunno if they actually KNEW that the vast majority of the 1000 Marines were dry (using blanks or nothing), but it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't. "Two Twits in a Toyota Take on Task Force" - reach Paradise. I only wish it had been a Live-Fire exercise and no Marine had been scratched, much less killed by such a pathetic pair.

Agreed. Hopefully they didn't manage to reproduce before removing themselves from the gene pool. If only we could convince the rest of them to just start killing each other instead of us...

But then, that's part of my point in removing our involvement from the region. With no hated Westerners to attack, they'll just revert to their bickering amongst themselves, hopefully with lots and lots of casualties.

Heh, heh - you have the heart of a plan, there! They DO fuck each other when someone like us is not there to fuck with. Hell, they fuck and suck each other ANYWAY in the Arab world. You do know about this, right? It's almost too disgusting to tell, so say yes. I don't wanna go into the details. Gives me the willies.

So I keep my hickory axe handle in the car and hope I'll get 5-6 good swings in should it ever come to that.

Lol. Hopefully it never does. But if so, make sure you get at least one or two of them into a state where they can't be identified easily. Hickory plus Face = Hilarity!

I ALMOST hope I get trapped, momentarily, and find myself in that situation - know what I mean? It would be disgusting to go out at the hands of a mob of dingbats unqualified to scrape gum off the bottom of my boot, but it would be soooo satisfying, after the buildup of frustration over the last 2 years to feel the solid thunk & crunch of Hickory (it even sez on the label that it's North Carolina Hickory - and damned proud of that fact, apparently!) on flesh / bone. You can prolly tell I'm a little wound up these days. Where the fuck is my Prozac? I had it here just a few days - or was it weeks? - ago. Gotta be here somewhere...

I'd agree, except we're talking about Arabs. They WON'T do anything about him.

I don't really care. Let him invade his neighbors, lob scuds over the borders, kill what remains of his "friends" in the region. Let them all get up in arms over him, and let them fight. It doesn't honestly matter WHO wins over there, or if there even ever IS a "winner". My point is that our presence over there polarizes almost all of them into hating one common foe. The vaccuum left by our noninterventionism over there would lead to them falling apart and all fighting each other, which I think you and I both agree would be nothing but beneficial for the rest of the world. If they ever DO sort anything out and stop fighting, whatever's left will be willing to listen to our force if we decide to wield it there. But as it is, our force there is like swinging a baseball bat at a swarm of gnats. Sure, we occasionally hit one or two, but the overall effect is somewhat less than intimidating as a whole...

Excellent points - but it's too late, IMHO.

Israel would get some so he could maintain his personal illusion that he is an Arab Model - he perceives himself to be Saladin. THAT, of course, would be his undoing. They would knock the snot out of him - and anyone else dumb enough to climb into the ring... wait - that's all of 'em. Europe would literally explode with righteous indignation as their local Arab immgrants, guest workers, "students", and other pretentious resource-gobbling rabble raised holy hell and (even more ferociously than usual) bit the hand that feeds, shelters, and protects them. Compared to back in '73 - the number of Arabs living in the US and Europe ahs skyrocketed. It would be pretty ugly, but it WOULD identify them for us - all we need is to know who isn't here for the subsidized education and Cable-TV Enhanced Boob Therapy Pkg.

I WOULD love to see them take out their aggressive behavior on each other, but it's far too late, IMHO. Every Friday they get the Weekly Hate Pitch - and we were selected for the honor of Great Satan - long ago. This has been building for more that 20 yrs, already (recall Teheran, the Shah, Rev Guard, Khomeini, et al) and we've just now felt the first full sting of a direct hit. It really IS a "battle joined" and the struggle IS freedom vs. their idea of virtue. The fact that it is unbelievably inane and demonstrable Total Fucking Bullshit makes no difference if they were brought up from birth in it - they can't hear you, wouldn't understand how to think about it and actually judge merit or lack of it, and are implacable. Those born to it (you can tech a child to believe ANYTHING, if you get control of him / her early enough) I can ALMOST forgive - converts are something else, entirely, worthy of a high rank on my list of The World's Stupidest or Most Selfish Humanoid Asswipes. Muhammed Ali, Kareem Abdul Jabar, and Will Smith (Weird Tingly Feeling did he pick for his Idiot Name?) can all kiss my hairy ass. I won't go into what I think of Farakhan, the cocksucker who sells out and lies to "his own people" for "power" and position. Shiteating scumsucking muckraking bottom-dwelling dream-stealing parasite. I don't have a strong opinion about these types of people, but I'll work one up if you request it.

I agree with the methodology. We have to play high-road hardball. The Big Kicker is: we need premium intelligence - unfiltered and unspun. We pretty much know who WE can trust. We need to start demonstrating, by example of our word being kept, that we can BE trusted. We have to develop sources everywhere and continue to aggressively pursue technology. I believe that humint is as valuable as elint; it depends upon each situation encountered which will deliver what is needed to support decision-making.

Hah. That'll be the day. I wonder if Colin Powell were president if we could actually start down such a path. My guts (and I have learned to trust my guts, usually) tell me that he would, if he could ever be convinced to run. Which my guts also tell me he couldn't. Oh well. We can always hope, right?

You nailed it. If only he would break free of whatever it is that he thinks holds him back, unless it's his family and himself - those are legitimate considerations. All else is BS... I would vote for Colin, and actually regain some of the enthusiasm I had back when I was a newly-enfranchised 18 yr old... I miss believing IN things, working towards some sort of positive outcome - defining positives that COULD BE. At present all I feel I do is write Letters to the Editor - which, of course, are all complaints about the negative state of how things ARE. Heavy heavy sigh.

I wonder if anyone who makes decisions in our Govt ever looks or listens to what avg Joes like us have to say...

No. And that's a pretty big part of the problem. The other part is that too many average Joes keep voting idiots into office that DON'T listen to what we have to say. It's because most average Joes are idiots themselves, methinks.

I hold up the subject of my "drivers test" post on HN yesterday as my example.

Oops, I haven't checked those results, yet. I prolly screwed the pooch. Gonna go check, now... Whew! B's across the board - so I didn't step on my dick!

I guess I'm getting more hawkish... My Iraq opinion was best described in a post I did on HN. It may be bad manners to quote yourself, but hell, I've tried rewriting it and making it better, but failed on every attempt. This really does capture my repcise feelings on the topic, given the current circumstances... So, apologies to those who've already seen this. I did make one tiny edit this time to enhance the clarity.
---------------------------------
Re: Being divided on Iraq
I echo this.

Part of me knows that there could be good to come from dealing with the situation with force. But it's anything but automatic - 50 things have to go right for the one good possibility to occur. Those are long odds. But we are taught that we must dare if we are to effect positive change. They leave out the part about what happens if we fail and that, regardless of the outcome, no one will care either way 1.5 generations hence. To quote some insipid Janet (or was it Janna?) Jackson song, "What have you done for me lately?" That this will occur seems to be the true Golden Rule.

Part of me knows that it may not matter, in the end, if we initiate or not. It will come to us, eventually. The real question, IMHO, is what will we face if we act vs. if we wait. Will we be greeted with the nastiest response humans have invented? Gas, Bugs, Big Boom? To err on the side of lesser grief, I guess now is better than later.

Part of me swears the effort will be pearls before swine.
---------------------------------

Yep, that sums it up for me at the moment.

News:

Recent Forum Posts

Shout Box

Author Topic: 9-11 (Read 23350 times)

Anonymous

Anonymous