LawTalkers - All Hank, all the time.

Originally posted by Spanky
Another email from a friend of mine (needless to say I wasn't invited to this briefing).

I attended a White House briefing led by Vice President Cheney. He noted, in his matter of fact way, that the terrorists have no illusion that they will defeat the United States militarily. Rather, they desire to break our will, to have us retreat behind our two oceans noting that we had no business inserting ourselves in Middle East affairs. Then, with the sole remaining superpower out of the way and demoralized, they can dominate the region.

It does seem that many in the United States are pushing for such an outcome. They argue that we have lost too many lives already, it is not our battle, and that we have made no progress. This latter point is buoyed by the observation that a civil war seems to be inevitable in Iraq. The reasoning apparently goes that our efforts have ultimately failed if the terrorists are lobbing bombs at their own people as opposed to us. And therefore we should retreat.

If the retreat of the US is the goal of the terrorists, we have too many voices urging our cooperation. I am certain that there is room for improvement in our efforts in that region, but we can not allow the harassment of our enemies, be it on the battlefield in Iraq or in our commercial airlines overhead, to cause us to retreat.

Agreed. We are a force for good in the world, and we do have the right to say "No, you may not be a barbarian society."

HOWEVER, this can only be done if we give the effort much needed gravitas:

1. A draft;
2. Our own respect for human rights (no more death penalty);
3. No more whorish cash grabs for our corps (giving Behctel and Halliburton the spoils).

It's terribly hypocritical to call someone out for his barbarism, bomb him, and then take his country's resources. If we are going to be the world's policeman, we have to be truly benevolent.

Penske_Account

08-11-2006 11:07 AM

Say it ain't so, Joe

[QUOTE]Originally posted by taxwonk
1. He's dead. Remember?

2. Who are you congratulating? [/QUOTE

1. So what? His legacy lives on and it should be confronted and dealt with in the way that we chose not to do with him personally.

2. Ty and his friends in Weurope, Moveon, the leftist blogosphere, the Nobel Committee and the UN.

Penske_Account

08-11-2006 11:14 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

In the wake of the discovery of the bomb plot in the United Kingdom, that aspiring terrorists planned to use binary chemicals to produce an explosive that would be detonated inflight, we can anticipate the following future developments:

1. The Sun rises in the East
2. You can contract a cold on board an aircraft
3. There is no system in place to detect explosives in cargo.

JESUS CHRIST!! How much stupidity must we endure from the Bush Administration? How much farther up their a-- can they stick their heads? Binary explosives, and their ready availability, have been a fact since World War II. And we're supposed to believe that George Bush, Tony Blair, and Michael Chertoff have just awakened to this fact? At a minimum, this is a further indictment of the incompetence of Bush and his cronies. They have done NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING to deal with this threat even though security professionals have known and fretted about this for years.

Larry Johnson

The problem is that their populaces are weak, spoiled whining fucking little babies. Go read the FB where people complain about not being able to take lotion on planes. The easy answer is that we should adopt the Israeli/El Al model, for the simple reason that it works.

Profiling-good; you don't like it find other means of commerce.

No carryons;

Armed troops in the airport;

Armed marshalls on every flight;

All checked luggage extensively screened and more limits on what could be brought on as checked luggage, maybe one small bag. Ship the rest. Maybe no checked bags. Don't like it, tough shit!

It'd be a pain, but it would be secure, and the markets would likely create some alternatives to deal with the difficulties.

And easy answer if you don't like it now, shut the fuck up and get a fractional share in a private jet. Like I did.

Boo yah!

sebastian_dangerfield

08-11-2006 11:15 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

In the wake of the discovery of the bomb plot in the United Kingdom, that aspiring terrorists planned to use binary chemicals to produce an explosive that would be detonated inflight, we can anticipate the following future developments:

1. The Sun rises in the East
2. You can contract a cold on board an aircraft
3. There is no system in place to detect explosives in cargo.

JESUS CHRIST!! How much stupidity must we endure from the Bush Administration? How much farther up their a-- can they stick their heads? Binary explosives, and their ready availability, have been a fact since World War II. And we're supposed to believe that George Bush, Tony Blair, and Michael Chertoff have just awakened to this fact? At a minimum, this is a further indictment of the incompetence of Bush and his cronies. They have done NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING to deal with this threat even though security professionals have known and fretted about this for years.

Larry Johnson

Nice try, Ty. Larry selectively focuses on the type of explosive, missing the fact that the Brits uncovered a conspiracy. Of course Bush, Blair and Chertoff were aware of this type of thing happening. And it has been thwarted. The Brits actually knew about this plot for a while, and just sat back and waited to cach more conspirators with a bigger net.

This editorial is the type of clever criticism the Left loves to throw when it loses face. They get a guy with experience in the field to take one aspect of the issue out of context and rip into it. Larry created a neat unsubstantiated strawman (the notion Bush and Blair weren't ready for binary weapons) then shredded it.

Sometimes, Ty, it's just better to concede the other side did a good job and move along. I admit whenh the Left has a better idea. I expect the Left to do the same. I at least expect you to do the same, being a non-Kool Aid drinker.

Penske_Account

08-11-2006 11:16 AM

Say it ain't so, Joe

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Bin Laden has people. Arafat had a people.

Arafat's people were made up. They were just as much King Hussien's people. Except he tried to exterminate them. In the name of Arab brotherhood, dignity and justice.

Penske_Account

08-11-2006 11:19 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield

This editorial is the type of clever criticism the Left loves to throw when it loses face.

They are not really that clever.

Tyrone Slothrop

08-11-2006 11:30 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
The problem is that their populaces are weak, spoiled whining fucking little babies. Go read the FB where people complain about not being able to take lotion on planes. The easy answer is that we should adopt the Israeli/El Al model, for the simple reason that it works.

Profiling-good; you don't like it find other means of commerce.

No carryons;

Armed troops in the airport;

Armed marshalls on every flight;

All checked luggage extensively screened and more limits on what could be brought on as checked luggage, maybe one small bag. Ship the rest. Maybe no checked bags. Don't like it, tough shit!

It'd be a pain, but it would be secure, and the markets would likely create some alternatives to deal with the difficulties.

The Israelis have a real commitment to security. They hire smart people who use their judgment to identify passengers who might pose a risk. TSA hires dopes whose judgment can't be trusted, and so rather than relying on their judgment it imposes stupid rules on everyone. Does it make sense for octogenarians in wheelchairs to get the same scrutiny as young men?

I'm not sure what you mean by profiling in this context, but we probably agree.

How long before laptops all have clear cases?

sebastian_dangerfield

08-11-2006 11:31 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

You just got your NetJets card now? You fucking prole.

Tyrone Slothrop

08-11-2006 11:32 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Nice try, Ty. Larry selectively focuses on the type of explosive, missing the fact that the Brits uncovered a conspiracy. Of course Bush, Blair and Chertoff were aware of this type of thing happening. And it has been thwarted. The Brits actually knew about this plot for a while, and just sat back and waited to cach more conspirators with a bigger net.

This editorial is the type of clever criticism the Left loves to throw when it loses face. They get a guy with experience in the field to take one aspect of the issue out of context and rip into it. Larry created a neat unsubstantiated strawman (the notion Bush and Blair weren't ready for binary weapons) then shredded it.

Sometimes, Ty, it's just better to concede the other side did a good job and move along. I admit whenh the Left has a better idea. I expect the Left to do the same. I at least expect you to do the same, being a non-Kool Aid drinker.

(1) I admit the British did a good job with this conspiracy. I'm not sure why this is an admission. It's not like I'm opposed to good law enforcement work.

(2) If you read that post, you'll see that Johnson was talking about the danger of binary explosive years ago. Do you think our government has done anything about that threat since then? Johnson doesn't, and he knows a little more about the subject than you or me.

sebastian_dangerfield

08-11-2006 11:33 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The Israelis have a real commitment to security. They hire smart people who use their judgment to identify passengers who might pose a risk. TSA hires dopes whose judgment can't be trusted, and so rather than relying on their judgment it imposes stupid rules on everyone. Does it make sense for octogenarians in wheelchairs to get the same scrutiny as young men?

I'm not sure what you mean by profiling in this context, but we probably agree.

How long before laptops all have clear cases?

Mine already does, with pink tint. Like my cell phone and my black and red U2 Ipod.

I'll have to remind my wife to get a clear plastic vibrator.

Tyrone Slothrop

08-11-2006 11:34 AM

Say it ain't so, Joe

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Arafat's people were made up. They were just as much King Hussien's people. Except he tried to exterminate them. In the name of Arab brotherhood, dignity and justice.

Strangely enough, they didn't see it that way. But I'm sure they would appreciate your attempt to have their interests represented ("represented") by a hereditary monarch from a different ethnic group.

Sidd Finch

08-11-2006 11:36 AM

Say it ain't so, Joe

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
There is a difference between "working with" and bestowing the title of "peacemaker". I will give you Jonas Savimbi but the Contras were not "terrorists". The were fighting against a government that was a dictatorship and they focused their fire on government troops. Yes, as with all soldiers, some got out of hand, but the labeling of the contras as terrorists was done by people who were sympathetic to the Sandinastas and refused to believe that the Sandinats were totalitarians that could care less about human rights and democracy. Because of the contras we now have a free market, human right respecting democracy in Nicaragua. Without the contras the Sandinistas would never have called an election and would still rule Nicaragua like Castro still rules Cuba.

Sorry, but terrorism is a question of tactics as well as cause. You would have called the same tactics used against a pro-market fascist terrorism.

andViolins

08-11-2006 11:37 AM

DHS, protecting you.

Quote:

How much do the security guards in Israel get paid vis a vis the "dopes" in the TSA? Perhaps we get what we pay for.

aV

Sidd Finch

08-11-2006 11:38 AM

Say it ain't so, Joe

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
In my mind, terrorism is a function of means, not ends. If George Washington had slaughtered Tory women and children in the name of independence, he would have been a terrorist. If I understand you correctly, you're not a terrorist if you're fighting someone bad, like the Sandinistas. If I understand Penske, you're not a terrorist if you slaughter women and children with government troops. I don't get why that should matter.

You misunderstand Penske. Unless I'm mistaken, Savimbi, for example, did not have government troops. He just liked to blow kids up. (As did so other terrorist organizations that Reagan and the Repub right-wing supported in Africa, like Renamo in Mozambique.)

I'm not claiming to understand Penske, just saying that you don't either.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:31 PM.

Page 224 of 334

224

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page