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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (215520)	1/20/2005 10:27:34 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1574068

I can see your point. However, the CIA, and FBI for that matter, have both been collossal failures on at least three very recent occassions when their expertise was/is critical: 1) uncovering the 9/11 plot, 2) determining with a reasonable degree of accuracy whether Saddam had WMD or not, 3) and finding Osama. See........this is why this situation is so serious. The CIA told Bush that it was not likely that Saddam had WMD. However, Bush CHOSE to go with a minority report within the CIA that said there were WMD because it fit his purpose. And when he could not find the WMD in Iraq, he conveniently blamed it on the CIA. And most of America.......you included......believe its true; that the CIA mislead him. As for OBL, that's the military's and Rummie's fault. There were not enough soldiers assigned the task and the ones that were let OBL slip away. As for 9/11, I agree the CIA and FBI screwed up but the biggest screw up was the military. They responded much too slowly when it became clear hijackings had occurred. They were not prepared at all for such an attack. And in their defense, I would have to say that I would have had a hard time comprehending and believing that the hijackers intended to ram the WTC. However, the real issue is that Bush and his cronies spent years painting the CIA and FBI as incompetents til finally they felt justified in taking them over. That's what people do when they want to increase and consolidate their power......people like Putin. A quick read of history will uncover a number of examples of leaders growing their power in this manner. So if Bush is taking power away from those groups, maybe our intelligence will get more effective. Or maybe we will be even more in the dark. This is the most secretive administration in a hundred years. What makes you think that they want effective intelligence? As far as Rumsfeld, I think Hersh has it wrong. They are already planning for Rumsfeld's resignation as soon as they can find a successor. As far as special forces and covert ops, I'm all for it. If Clinton had not decimated our covert ops capabilities, perhaps we would have been able to have enough intelligence on the ground to uncover Saddam's true capabilities or find leads on terrorists to find Osama or uncover large catastrophic attacks like 9/11. MM, you just do not get it. Rummie is staying....he is doing what they want. You buy into this rightie perspective because it fits your ideology. Bush is neither right nor left......he is a breed unto his own. One thing I hate about the Europeans and Clinton for that matter is that they wanted to negotiate with Iran and North Korea on the basis of providing economic aid in exchange for halting the nuke programs. That's like bribing a murderer not to commit murder. I am fundamentally against appeasement of any sort. Instead, I think we should take a very hard line against tyrants who flirt with WMD. Isolation, economic starvation, covert ops, sanctions. That's how you deal with rogue nations. However, in the mean time, as the Europeans try to get Iran to see reason, I think the threat of Bush ordering an attack is a nice piece of leverage the Europeans can use against Iran behind closed doors. So I think we should keep our tough stance, whether or not we mean it. I don't have time for this nonsense......economic deprivation turns people into desperate creatures and when they finally get some freedom they act like animals [see Iraq]. China is democraticizing in big part because its economy is becoming more capitalistic. Capitalism is not very compatible with totalitarianism. Economic laissez faire leads to personal freedom. IMO encouraging nations to become democratic through economic incentives is one of the better ways to disarm a nation. Turkey is becoming more sensitive to humanitarian issues because it badly wants to join the EU. As a consequence, less Kurds are dying in Turkey. As far as the impact of an attack on Iran, I do worry about it. Iran is not the pushover that Iraq was. Iran will use all its terrorist muscles to attack us at home and abroad. They are already preparing for it by recruiting a jihadi army. Also, I worry about Israel. If we attack and don't get all their missile capabilities first, then Israel will get bombed pretty badly. I also don't think Iran will collapse easily as some neocons might think. Those mullahs are a fairly widespread cancer. They have a chokehold on Iran that will not be easily broken. Funny, I don't think Iran has ever attacked another nation in the past 100 years but you are convinced they are this horrible monster. I grow more confused as to whom exactly is the monster. So what are you concerned about in particular? Is it the concentration of covert ops control under the Pentagon, with Rumsfeld at the helm? I am concerned with this administration and how it has turned this nation into one populated by a lot of war mongerers..........one where we are convinced that might makes right.........where old lessons have become unimportant and are discarded. I am concerned that we are no longer perceived as an enlightened superpower but one from the dark side. And its not just the Indonesias that fear us........our former EU allies are not very comfortable with us either. Bush is appealing to the baser side of many people.......he has convinced them he knows what he is doing and God has sanctioned his every move. Any student of history would be chilled by such a turn of events. ted