Re: Religious Extremists
pistoff wrote:Could it be that Amerika is run by a few of those, hoping to dominate the world?
Is Amerika on a Crusade with God on Our Side? Allah is a false idol, right?
I was under the impression that Allah was or is God ....
I believe our friend Pistoff is referring to the general appointed by Rummy who has been quoted as telling an audience that Allah is a false idol.
Some thoughts on the Shrub's war: The ability of the U.S. military to find and take out guerillas in Iraq is very poor. Our human intelligence resources there are almost non-existent, and largely consist of walk-ins who tip off the military. The political climate in a particular region of that country seems to be significant-the raid which killed Saddam's sons was the result of such a walk-in tip off. Due both to the Kurds and the high quality of the 101st Airborn's occupation doctrine (thanks to General Patreus), this is a part of Iraq with more stability, more "normalcy." This is not so in the rest of the country. Given the number of attacks with remotely detonated roadside bombs, it seems very likely that the "resistance" (probably Baatist in origin, and reinforced by foreign loonies eager to get a good seat in paradise) has much better intelligence than do we. I suspect that this was not foreseen, and that we lack the intelligence resources in terms of soldiers with the necessary language skills and cultural knowledge to develop human intelligence. The stepped-up attacks on Iraqi police point to this in my mind, since they have the necessary language skills-and crucially, the ability to spot a foreign accent, and therefore a suspicious character. Saddam and the Baatist may have been low-rent thugs, but they displayed good political instincts. I haven't any doubt that they understand that anything which interferes with reconstruction is a successful blow against American efforts to win public support in Iraq. They are winning that battle-and they're winning it because the U.S. military did not come in prepared for this aspect of the war. Blame Rummy if you will, I'm sure Republican policy makers do-he is a liability, and even if Bush is reelected, it doubt that Rummy will survive. Whether or not, this all seems to me further evidence that the Shrub and Company went into this thing clueless, and haven't learned anything useful since the war started.
I agree with you up to, "haven't learned anything useful since the war started", could you expound, please?
Well, i feel that they have wasted a lot of time and resources looking for the ellusive WoMD's, when they ought to have been concentrating on ending the war, which is far from over. I also think that all real progress which has been made there has been made by intelligent commanders on the ground, but that the Pentagon leadership has not taken the lessons, because i would suggest that if it were otherwise, they'd be taking lessons from officers such as Patraeus, and would be concentrating their efforts in two areas: anti-insurgency and "normalization" of the common economic situations. If once the Iraqis believe we can keep the lights on, guarantee clean water and waste removal, keep the schools open, and give them a reasonable shot at a living wage, i believe we will soon have millions of allies in the anti-insurgency. Screw the WoMD's, we all know they fudged and lied; we have a huge problem, and they're swatting flies in the middle of an elephant stampede.
I don't think all these events are happening as independently as you portray them, I think there is a balance in all the operations going on there. They are disadvantaged by communications as you say, but are figuring that out daily. Much is being learned here in that regard, and will be helpful for future dealings with the region whether they be military or political.
Well, it seems that you and i agree in all things except one. I think the military learns, our armed forces have demonstrated that they can learn lessons in combat and apply them. I have less reason to believe that those in power in the administration learn--i believe they are too busy looking for the proper spin, and looking to the next election. This isn't a partisan condemnation, it could be applied to anyone's administration. I consider it a good thing that the officers and men and women on the ground are learning--they will be our resource if we are to improve our standing in the region. It would helpful, though, if the administration were learning the lessons the officers on the ground are learning, and were making a concerted effort to profit from those lessons. I would be sceptical of a contention that that is currently the case.
I think the administration put the contraption together without a manual and screwed it up. People like that never learn -- they'll avoid the manual when the next contraption offers itself.
Tartar, What I've been observing about this administration is that anybody that doesn't play along with their agenda is soon removed from their office or rank. When they move like a tyrant, talk like a tyrant, and acts like a tyrant, it must be a tyrant.
The hospital unit at Fort Stewart? The mess that was found there -- military waiting for treatment? Now the same situation has cropped up in Fort Knox.
Again, think national healthcare.
Sure looks as though The Current Administration still has plenty to do to reverse the depredations visited on the national security infrastructure, military and intelligence alike, visited upon them by The Immediate Preceeding Administration.
the canadian broadcsting corporation (CBC) last night aired a one hour program re. september 11. if you do not have time to read the whole script, i suggest you read the interview with eleanor hill (i'm sure you know who she is!). her interview is included in THE COGRESSIONAL REPORT. i don't think i should print the whole story here; it would take up much space. enjoy ! hbg
From a different view .......
Source
UN, US and IRAQ
on rereading my earlier entry i notice that i forgot to supply the website for the cbc. here it is :
www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/index.html
Quote:Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an
occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing
objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under the
circumstances, there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating
another of our principles. ....
Gelisgesti...link please....
Hi B. There was just the quote ... 'All hat and no cattle'.
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/
set
The general (Boykin) is also Undersecretary of Defence for Intelligence.
I couldn't remember what sinecure they'd given him . . . the old joke about military intelligent being an oxymoron is more than beggared by that ugly reality . . .
