|
Post by Wyndham on Jan 13, 2005 11:07:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Jan 13, 2005 16:36:31 GMT -5
Mark Steyn identifies as a columnist with Britain's Telegraph group.
The Australian is Murdoch's 'broadcsheet' here and the only nationwide newspaper. It is a cheer squad for - as you read - for Bush et al. It has one or two token left wing voices like Philip Adams.
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Jan 14, 2005 16:43:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Aravis on Jan 15, 2005 2:23:55 GMT -5
Something should really be done about Murdoch. He reminds me of Jonathan Price's villain in that James Bond movie... On another note, Army SPC. Charles Graner Jr. has been found guilty on all counts. He also had an affair with a couple of the female soldiers under his command from what I'm reading. Looking at him, I can only wonder why. He isn't attractive inside or out, so it can't be for his wonderful personality. Must be something about being in combat together. Yet another reason I'm glad I'm ineligible for the armed services!
|
|
Nulla
Junior Member
Posts: 55
|
Post by Nulla on Jan 17, 2005 15:41:04 GMT -5
|
|
wordswordswords
Full Member
"There's no harm in hoping." - Voltaire
Posts: 178
|
Post by wordswordswords on Jan 17, 2005 21:16:36 GMT -5
Nulla, the information comes from a "usually reliable source," as they say--Seymour Hersh and The New Yorker.
Unfortunately. I wish this didn't have all the ring of truth to it.
Looks as if this administration believes that if one war is good, two wars are twice as good, and three wars....
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Jan 18, 2005 15:17:36 GMT -5
Strange how predictable some things are. Here's an editorialist who professes to believe that war between Iran and the US and Israel is a done deal, Iraq fiasco notwithstanding. newyorker.com/fact/content/?050124fa_fact
|
|
wordswordswords
Full Member
"There's no harm in hoping." - Voltaire
Posts: 178
|
Post by wordswordswords on Jan 18, 2005 23:53:25 GMT -5
Wyn, that is the article Nulla posted about, but you've given the actual article. I look forward to reading it a bit later when I can give it the attention it surely deserves.
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on Jan 19, 2005 1:16:45 GMT -5
Déjà vu; all over again!
Hersh’s article has also been noted on some of the network news programs.
Some of the more soothing commentators pointed out that the DOD has contingency plans covering all sorts of hypothetical situations. That set off some very disturbing echoes in my memory. The same commentary was made when it was first leaked in 2002 that the DOD was studying possible invasion plans for Iraq.
Nothing to worry about. Just covering all possibilities. Never happen; really!
My immediate reaction is that Bush couldn’t possibly sell it – again. But then at first I didn’t believe that he would be able to sell it the first time.
I tend to agree with Nulla, as to Georgie going over the edge; need I add, ‘round the bend. It seems incredible to me that he could sell this same load of dreck to the people twice. And yet they did just reelect the bum, didn’t they?
Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad!
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Jan 19, 2005 11:13:18 GMT -5
Yikes, yikes and yikes! Something called the 'Salvador option' is being considered for Iraq, it appears. Direct military action will stop. Special forces/Iraqi irregular kill squads will take out opposition targets. I hope El Salvador in the 1980s isn't being considered as a suitable end state for Iraq, achievement of which will permit the final declaration of 'victory' and withdrawal. If that's what follows, then I guess 'had to intervene to stop an evil monster and bring freedom' will join WMD on the dustbin of pretexts. I'm with Pink. If that's freedom, Saddam was better. Q. What genius would ever imagine that outside Fort Bragg calling anything the 'Salvador option' would be anything but a public relations fiasco? www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1386816,00.html
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Jan 19, 2005 15:22:15 GMT -5
I read denials from the White House. Very Wag the Dog though.
|
|
|
Post by demgoddess on Jan 21, 2005 16:41:56 GMT -5
Just for fun, I "translated" some of Bush's speech on my blog. I thought a few of you might get a kick out of it given your personal politics. If you want to wander over, you can find the translation here.
|
|
|
Post by Aravis on Jan 22, 2005 1:11:56 GMT -5
And they really are worth the quick trip over there.
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Jan 22, 2005 17:30:44 GMT -5
Dem, that was good and I think Woody summed it up, ' So true, so tragic, so funny...'
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on Jan 24, 2005 18:47:31 GMT -5
Here is something that I would like to keep an eye on. Following America’s Civil War the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was passed. In brief, this makes it illegal for federal military and civil law enforcement forces to operate jointly, this was done to protect the then occupied Southern States from federal abuse of power. Since 1980 the Department of Defense has created a Joint Special Operations Command. Overtly, this was a command to carry out special operations requiring a high degree of inter-service cooperation. It has been more and more reported that this command is primarily tasked with “black ops”, covert operations which only the DOD needs to know about. The attached makes rather “dry” reading, but note the waver of the Posse Comitatus act permitting JSOC operations within US borders in the name of anti-terrorism. globalsecurity.org/military/agency/dod/jsoc.htmAlso making the news the DOD has finally made public the existence of its Defense Intelligence Agency, a separate espionage and covert ops branch which does not share with CIA or Homeland Security. Apparently this is accountable to no one but Rumsfeld himself. www.nytimes.com/2005/01/24/politics/24rumsfeld.html?thReminds me more than a little of the old cartoon strip, “Spy versus Spy”.
|
|