Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (126723)	3/21/2004 11:16:28 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Clarke makes it clear: Bush was asleep on the job. His national security team was asleep on the job. This is not news -- the picture was already pretty clear from prior disclosures from other people. But Clarke puts it all together. Look at the credentials of Rice -- she was brought in on the strength of her knowledge of Russia. Prior to 9/11 she had not even bothered to review the terrorism files passed on by Berger. The intelligence community has been profoundly disappointed in Bush and this has been a source of friction. The military has had significant conflict with Rumsfeld -- and yes part of that is because Rumsfeld was charged with doing some things differently -- but for the most part it is because Rumsfeld is an arrogant son-of-a-bitch who does not view other people as worthy of his time and attention. The reaction to 9/11 was not focused on terrorism -- it was focused on settling an old score unrelated to terrorism. If you are serious about fighting terrorism and not just a partisan hack, a very critical review of Bush is essential. Put aside all the BS about left and right. Put aside all the crap about pacificism. Take a hard look -- a really hard look -- at the Bush Administration. Be honest, not partisan. The focus was on Russia before 9/11 and on Iraq after 9/11. A single-minded focus on terrorism, its roots, and building the set of global alliances needed to fight terrorism have never been at the top of the agenda of this Administration. When Bush says "back my war on terrorism" he is really saying "I will do whatever I wish and call it the war on terror -- back my agenda uncritically and do not evaluate my performance." Well I am critical and in my view his performance on national security is appalling. I am strongly in favor of a real war on terror -- not a fake one with Iraq as the center piece.