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: Sun Tzu who wrote (152979)	11/30/2004 3:27:43 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

'Members, whose appointed terms range from one to four years, are selected on the basis of their preeminence in the fields of science, technology and its application to military operations, research, engineering, manufacturing and acquisition process.' In other words, their expertise does NOT lie in Islamic Studies, the Middle East, Foreign Policy, Terrorism, or anything else they are speculating on in this report. In fact, they may as well be a group of software engineers randomly picked from the Microsoft campus, for all the authority with which they speak in this area.

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (152979)	11/30/2004 3:35:10 PM
From: Neocon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Who are the most hostile groups to the US? Not moderate regimes, like Morocco or Tunisia, but radical regimes, like Iran and Iraq (under Saddam). What groups most revile us? Groups like Al Qaeda and Hezbollah, who, among other things, would like to establish Shari'ah states throughout the Muslim world, similar to that established by the Taliban in Afghanistan. Of course they hate us for our freedom, for our secularism, for our support of civil liberties and the enfranchisement of women, and so forth. The initial premise is laughable.

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (152979)	11/30/2004 3:51:08 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

This report is available at acq.osd.mil , though the google hmtl version at 64.233.167.104 might be more convenient. The cited NYT article is nytimes.com, which I will quote for the record: U.S. Fails to Explain Policies to Muslim World, Panel Says By THOM SHANKER WASHINGTON, Nov. 23 - A harshly critical report by a Pentagon advisory panel says the United States is failing in its efforts to explain the nation's diplomatic and military actions to the Muslim world, but it warns that no public relations plan or information operation can defend America from flawed policies. The Defense Science Board report, which has not been released to the public, says the nation's institutions charged with "strategic communication" are broken, and calls for a comprehensive reorganization of government public affairs, public diplomacy and information efforts. "America's negative image in world opinion and diminished ability to persuade are consequences of factors other than the failure to implement communications strategies," says the 102-page report, completed in September. "Interests collide. Leadership counts. Policies matter. Mistakes dismay our friends and provide enemies with unintentional assistance. Strategic communication is not the problem, but it is a problem." The study does not constitute official policy, but it is described by the Pentagon's civilian and military leadership as capturing the essential themes of a debate that is now roiling not just the Defense Department but the entire United States government. The debate centers on how far the United States can and should go in managing, even manipulating, information to deter enemies and persuade allies or neutral nations. There is little disagreement about the importance and utility of battlefield deception to help assure the success of a military operation and protect American or allied soldiers. But there is great concern among public affairs officials in the military at proposals for regional or even global information operations, especially if those efforts include falsehoods. The rub is that in an environment of 24-hour news and the Internet, overseas information operations easily become known to the American people, and any specific government-sponsored information campaign not based on fact risks damaging the nation's overall credibility. The Defense Science Board report, "Strategic Communication," proposes a permanent "strategic communication structure" within the White House National Security Council and urges elevated roles and responsibilities for a designated senior officer within other government organizations, including the State Department and the Pentagon. The report compares the national security challenge of the post-Sept. 11 world to the decades-long struggle against Soviet Communism. But the study then argues that the government's cold-war-era communications institutions have not understood that the Islamic world - and extremists operating in the Islamic world - present different challenges. The report scolds the government for casting the new threat of Islamic extremism in a way that offends a large portion of those living in the Muslim world. "In stark contrast to the cold war, the United States today is not seeking to contain a threatening state empire, but rather seeking to convert a broad movement within Islamic civilization to accept the value structure of Western Modernity - an agenda hidden within the official rubric of a 'War on Terrorism,' " the report states. "Today we reflexively compare Muslim 'masses' to those oppressed under Soviet rule," the report adds. "This is a strategic mistake. There is no yearning-to-be-liberated-by-the-U.S. groundswell among Muslim societies - except to be liberated perhaps from what they see as apostate tyrannies that the U.S. so determinedly promotes and defends." The report says that "Muslims do not 'hate our freedom,' but rather they hate our policies," adding that "when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy." In the eyes of the Muslim world, the report adds, "American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering." The report also says: "The critical problem in American public diplomacy directed toward the Muslim world is not one of 'dissemination of information' or even one of crafting and delivering the 'right' message. Rather it is a fundamental problem of credibility. Simply, there is none - the United States today is without a working channel of communication to the world of Muslims and of Islam." Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, said the report had elevated the debate within the Defense Department, but he said no formal decisions had been made about reorganizing how the Pentagon and military communicate. "We're wrestling with this," Mr. Di Rita said. "But it doesn't change the underlying principle, at least with respect to the Department of Defense. Our job is to put out information to the public that is accurate, and to put it out as quickly as we can."

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (152979)	11/30/2004 11:34:00 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

> 'They hate our policies, not our freedom' < They probably hate us destroying their cities too. nytimes.com The full extent of the damage inflicted by American bombs, tanks and artillery is only now becoming apparent. The number of buildings destroyed in the fighting is far higher than 200, the figure released last week by the Iraqi prime minister, Ayad Allawi, engineers and commanders say. The city's power lines are so badly damaged that in most of the city, they will have to be ripped out and rebuilt from scratch - a project that will take six months to a year, American engineers say. Damage to the city's water and sewer pipes, already badly corroded before the invasion, is milder but will also take months to repair. But its to be a grand experiment. Lets blow it up real good and start over! Work for the locals, and our favorite US contractors too. In short, the Marines envision a huge effort of social and physical engineering, all intended to transform a bastion of militant anti-Americanism into a benevolent and functional metropolis. But will it work? "The best place to bring a model town into place is Falluja," Colonel Ballard said. But if similar rebuilding efforts in Najaf and elsewhere are any guide, the project under way here - far more ambitious than anything yet tried in this country - will be more expensive and time-consuming than its planners think. Reconstruction projects undertaken in Najaf since the fighting there in August, for instance, have been plagued by corruption, overpayment and shoddy work, relief officials said. Not if the "insurgents" have anything to say about it. To prevent looting, the head of every household will be asked to wear an identification badge Hmmn... that sounds like arm bands on... no, it couldn't be. No cars will be allowed in the city at first, to prevent car bombs. Instead, a bus system will provide free transportation. Well that will work, until the first "martyr" hops on board a bus and blows himself up. Already, American civil affairs teams have begun making condolence payments to residents who were injured or had their houses destroyed in the attack, up to a maximum of $2,500 per person. The interim Iraqi government has also promised $100 to each returning family. For I don't care too much for money, For money can't buy love. Can't buy me love, ev'rybody tells me so, Can't buy me love, no, no, no, no. Can't buy me love, love, Can't buy me love.