Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (185539)	4/25/2006 9:20:28 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) of 281500

But $18 Million was allocated for the operation. Where did it go? Who spent the money? And who authorized the expenditures? The words used in the article were: "He and the C.I.A. put together an $18 million package to undertake it." From a Federal Budget perspective, I don't know what that means. It doesn't say that it an "appropriated" amount. You're making an inference that it was appropriated. For the sake of argument let's suppose it was appropriated. [Though we would have to know the specific words of the appropriation to know what was required in terms of action.] I hope you don't think that anyone really knows where the money went or would even care about a mere $18M. If the money was appropriated and then "moved" to another program it's not possible to know that through DoD accounting practices. People may make a decision to move money from one program to another but the accounting of it is another matter. Money sits in a "pot" if it's spent then there might be an accounting record of the money being spent on that program. If it's not spent there's no accounting record of what it was on. If there were actually an effort expended by the CIA [employees] to assassinate the President of Iran there wouldn't be an accounting record of the money spent. CIA employees don't fill out a time card which would say: Week 23, 6 hours, Task: Assassinate the President of Iran. It's just a 40 hour work week. They wouldn't file an expense report: Bought two AK-47s to assassinate the President of Iran. $200; ammunition: $40. [See attached sales receipt from Abduhl.] Only when there is reciprocity. I feel no compulsion to restrict myself to adhering to a treaty when dealing with a government that is blatantly violating that same treaty. Which gives you something in common with North Korea. They said they didn't get the reactor and weren't obligated to adhere to their part of the bargain. This, apparently, is a major difference between our respective views. You seem wiling to hold us to obeyance of such treaties, while permitting other governments to violate them. Correct. I don't share the view of you and the President of North Korea. And under such circumstances, US Foreign Policy will always be hamstrung and operate in a unrealistic manner that cannot successfully confront the violators who's sole purpose is to undermine democratic values and impose totalitarian domination over humanity. Treaties provide a mechanism for addressing violations of treaties. Sometimes they are successful. For example, the US was in blatant violation of trade agreements when it subsidized the cotton industry to a tune of $4B year. Under your philosophy, other countries would have ignored the mechanisms for resolving the dispute. Instead they chose to use the mechanisms of the agreement which took years to resolve. Congress chose to ignore this for a period of time which resulted in penalities to the US. Money down the toilet, IMO. Then there's the Algiers Accords, which I know you don't want to talk about. I'm not aware of any position by the US Government that Iran is blatantly violating the Algiers Accords. Perhaps there is and perhaps you might even know what it is. One of those: God works in mysterious ways. jttmab

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next