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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (148550)	11/24/2005 11:52:00 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793587

The throwing flowers thing I think was a phrase that came from Cheney or WOlfowitz saying we would be greeted as liberators by the Iraqi, evoking images of WWII. You are correct. It was that coupled with comments from Kanan Makiya. >>(QUESTIONER): Vice President Cheney yesterday said that he expects that American forces will be greeted as liberators and I wonder if you could tell us if you agree with that and how you think they'll be greeted and also what you meant you said before that some Iraqi opposition groups might be in Baghdad even before American forces? KANAN MAKIYA: I most certainly do agree with that. As I told the President on January 10th, I think they will be greeted with sweets and flowers in the first months and simply have very, very little doubts that that is the case. This is a remarkable situation in which the population of a country that's about to have a war waged over its head positively wants the war while all kinds of other countries don't for one reason or another. That should tell us a lot about this war and about the future (INAUDIBLE) which I think is desufficiently emphasized. As in regards to what the opposition can do inside the Iraqi cities, its resources are great. There are networks of contacts that have been cultivated over many, many years. We expect that they will be working, they already are, and precisely how and in what ways it would not be wise to go into.<< benadorassociates.com I am pretty comfortable with what I remember of my reading Your recollection is very much like mine. I think that folks who made up their minds about Iraq early (or instantaneously) may not remember all the discussion. I remember it because, like you, I was listening to all sides trying to make up my mind. I have lots and lots of clips from that period. My collection contains things that were interesting to me at the time. I have clumps of clips pertaining to each issue that I worked through, for example, the appropriateness of preemptive war, the rationale for the war, the 'tude of Bush and his boyz, the planting democracy strategy, etc. I spent some time looking through the early ones this morning. I don't have much about what anti-war people predicted early on would happen. A lot of that came from the pacifists and nut jobs and I didn't find it worth saving. What I did come across today on point fell into two general areas--concern about breeding a new generation of terrorists and misunderstanding the nature of the Iraqi culture and its receptiveness and readiness for democracy.

To: Rambi who wrote (148550)	11/24/2005 1:02:18 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793587

Appreciate your comments, and most especially, the way you present them. Always in a gentle, and thoughtful, articulate way. Great talent you have, Rambi! I smiled when you let us know about Ammo's "It's just my way" thought. Isn't that the truth...we all have those little 'quirks' and it's wonderful when little ones let us know that they know we do...<gg> Re your thought here: The throwing flowers thing I think was a phrase that came from Cheney or WOlfowitz saying we would be greeted as liberators by the Iraqi, evoking images of WWII. I still haven't found that it was either Cheney or Wolfowitz (or any of the other top Adm leaders) that said that...I see that kholt found a link and has responded to you, and I'll address that when I say Hi to her. But it definitely wasn't presented in her link as that Cheney, Wolfowitz, Bush, etc said this. Re: My personal conclusion was that we handled things poorly in terms of diplomacy, that our own interests may have been better served by spending more time containing, evaluating, giving more time to global acceptance, and that we weren't at all prepared-- not just unprepared for some things, but almost everything. And also we failed to understand- or at least credit-- the true nature of Iraq, it's history, its tribalism, its lack of a national character, its distrust of the west going back so many years. On hindsight, I think most of what you comment on above is true. However, I will say this: I've thought for a long time that we had 40 years of total one side of the aisle control of both the House, and the Senate, and the Presidency. I'm not sure that we have had the best advice we could have partially because after 40 years in control of the various agencies, the bureaucrats may have just ::: a) either not had the info ready, or b) not wanted this "new group" to have it. I wish I didn't have that niggling thought, but I do... That said, I do think the "new group" ~~ the new Bush administration ~~ could, and should have had much better communication with these various agencies, internally and externally, but more importantly, with the citizens of the US. Re: I have no problem accepting that there have been screwups all along the way, but fail to see why saying that Clinton was bad in any way mitigates the current admin.'s actions. The thoughts an the Intel Agencies including the CIA: Was the book by Robert Baer? The reason I included Clinton as being at fault was the reasons I noted before...the cuts in the CIA budget of major proportions, and the cutting of the human resources on the field and had been for years and years. We all recognize that it just isn't possible to drop in new assets via parachute when one needs some new intel....Although there is a vocal group that must think that, because they don't seem to recognize why we didn't know more....I'm thinking here about WMD, in a country the size of CA. WMD can be chemical and bio as well as nukes... As I've said before, chemical and bio is just as bad for me to contemplate as is nuclear weapons. Maybe even more so. Look at the pics that are slowly coming out of China and the chemical problems they are experiencing today...! Re bio...all we have to do is think of a little anthrax here, and there, and there and there....OR some smallpox here and there, and it spreads. There are way too many others to contemplate. A-Q and related groups don't seem to lack for suicide bombers. How many do we think it would take to bring chemicals or bio items around the US? At least Saddam isn't paying their families $25,000 or more a "pop" any more. I know many here will be thinking of the troops and our country as they sit down to dinner. I hope everyone realizes that, agree or disagree, we all love the US and all that she is. So true, Rambi...so true!