0
   

Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld axis, Iran, and US foreign policy

 
 
sumac
 
Reply Thu 13 Jul, 2006 12:02 pm
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060710fa_fact

Seymour Hersch

Read it as a basis for starting a discussion.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 683 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Jul, 2006 06:23 pm
I read this piece yesterday. One must read the whole thing, but here is a sample from partway through:

Quote:
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Jul, 2006 06:30 pm
It does appear that the military is flexing its' muscles in a tad more independent manner, particularly in light of the military's authoritarian organizational structure.

And it appears that they are all talking with one another. Retired with active, active with active. This has to be a good thing.

Hersch appears to have the confidence of a great many of inside, informed people. I hung on every word of the "Pentagon consultant" or "government consultant with ties to Pentagon civilian officers".

I do hope that a lot of people read the piece.

It also highlights how the Bush administration has changed its tune from a go it alone if necessary, cowboy (or outlaw?) approach, to more of a team member prepared to compromise. Better late than never, I suppose.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Jul, 2006 07:35 am
bookmark
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Jul, 2006 10:59 am
I gather they had to give in about using nukes and they say that they will go to negotiations with China and Russia but not unless Iran stops all uranium enrichment activities first, in other words Iran conceding the negotiations before they start the negotiations. Typical, I hope everything else don't go as typical or else the administration will ignore the saner heads and go ahead and bomb Iran and then Iran will come over the border into Iraq and Afghanistan. Chances are we won't even know where they are anyway.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Jul, 2006 05:33 am
Hi Sumac

That was a very interesting article by Hersch, thanks for posting it.

It doesnt fill one with confidence though, especially in the light of what's going on in Lebanon.

We see the same tactic employed everytime when a military strike is planned.

Make an offer of talks that you know will be rejected. How ridiculous to make conditions about Iran's nuclear fuel cycle, when that was the main subject of negotiations.

He did the same with Saddam. Saddam had to "prove" that he didnt have[/i] any wmd. Not every one is dumb enough to fall for that. Its not possible to prove a negative.

The Israelis wont consider prisoner exchange...or rather they will providing it comprises Hezbollah returning their soldiers, and Israel not returning any of the Palestinians and others they hold.

The casual observer might think these positions quite reasonable, expecially when given the usual media gloss.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld axis, Iran, and US foreign policy
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 02:11:25