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: i-node who wrote (384697)	5/17/2008 1:18:40 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1574270

McCain's amazing Iraq somersault The "straight talker" has trashed anyone who dared suggest a withdrawal date. Now he's floated one of his own. By Joe Conason May. 16, 2008 \| For a straight-talking maverick, John McCain certainly knows how to parse and pander. During this year's campaign he has already flipped and flopped on such major issues as taxation and immigration to pacify the Republican base -- but now he has executed a stunning reversal of position on Iraq war policy, which he has often touted as the symbol of his political steadfastness. The man who scorched poor Mitt Romney because he once alluded to a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops promised on Wednesday to bring them home by January 2013, or less than five years from now. We will have "won" by then, so why not? The Columbus, Ohio, speech into which McCain tucked this convenient guarantee was a happy description of the utopia we will inhabit following his first term as president. Most of these assertions are hardly worth arguing over, since the candidate provided little or no explanation for how he hopes to achieve drastically reduced healthcare costs, vastly improved public education, or any of his other enticing promises. But Iraq is a different matter, because McCain has attacked both Democrats and Republicans repeatedly for daring to suggest a date for withdrawal. Ever since the last time he discussed how long he expected U.S. troops to remain in Iraq -- when he made the mistake of mentioning a hundred years as a possibility -- his campaign has complained bitterly that his remarks were distorted. To avoid anything like that happening again, here is what he said in Columbus on the subject of Iraq, in full: "By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is spasmodic and much reduced. Civil war has been prevented; militias disbanded; the Iraqi Security Force is professional and competent; al-Qaida in Iraq has been defeated; and the Government of Iraq is capable of imposing its authority in every province of Iraq and defending the integrity of its borders. The United States maintains a military presence there, but a much smaller one, and it does not play a direct combat role." He then went on to predict that the Taliban, too, would be largely defeated in Afghanistan, while we will be mopping up "the remnants of al-Qaida," with the help of the Government of Pakistan, which presumably also helped us to kill or capture Osama bin Laden and deny any safe haven to the terrorists. What McCain omitted from his uplifting address were any details concerning how he expected to achieve these brilliant results, which sound fantastically remote from the actual facts on the ground at present. In Afghanistan, for instance, the NATO coalition is barely holding the line against the Taliban, as the new government in Pakistan seeks negotiations rather than confrontation with the Islamist militants in its frontier regions. And in Iraq, the notion of a "professional and competent" security force or even a real government remains as distant as when the surge urged by McCain began last year. Perhaps the Columbus speech was merely what corporate public relations specialists call a "vision statement." Certainly there are enough mountebanks, phonies and professional lobbyists surrounding the straight-talker to convince him that this would be a good idea. These smooth advisors presumably expected everyone to forget that their candidate has denounced as appeasers and worse anyone who dared to suggest a target date, a benchmark or a timetable for getting out of Iraq. What is most insulting about this ploy, obviously designed to insulate McCain from public discontent over the war, is that he must know how fraudulent it is. He knows that even under optimal conditions we cannot bring "most" of the troops home in less than 16 months. If he can do the arithmetic, he knows for that level of withdrawal to occur by January 2013, the victory he touts would have to be achieved within two years after he takes office. Many analysts think that the conditions he sets forth will never be achieved, period; nobody believes they will be achieved within the next 30 months. McCain also knows that the troop levels undergirding the surge cannot be sustained much longer, let alone for another two or three or five years. This war has already inflicted grave stress on the readiness of the Army and Marines, which will take a long time and a large investment to repair. Instead of chanting "flip-flop" like the Republicans did to John Kerry, maybe we should look on the brighter side of McCain's latest somersault, and simply accept his decision to reduce the occupation's prospective duration by 95 years. At this rate, by November he will be promising that the war will be won and the ponies will magically appear just as soon as he is inaugurated. -- By Joe Conason

To: i-node who wrote (384697)	5/17/2008 4:33:12 PM
From: SilentZ	Respond to of 1574270

> You can crank out tejeks and Zs of Silence on a daily basis, spouting your anti-American, pro-Islam, pro-ME views, perhaps for a lifetime. Allahu akhbar, motherfucker! -Z

To: i-node who wrote (384697)	5/17/2008 8:50:59 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574270

I know this is confusing for you since its not what happens in Arkansas schools but we let the kids find their own way politically and philosophically. Utter bullshit. Just as you have been indoctrinated, so, too, are the kids you will teach. The kids have asked both my mentor teacher and I who we want for president. We refuse to tell them. Its called encouraging them to do their own critical thinking without prejudicing them. I don't know where you went to school, but I understand you are fresh out of college. I'd wager that during the course of your college studies, you took one or more courses in "Middle East Studies" -- or something of that nature. This cannot, of course, be proven, since we don't know whether you would be honest about it. Interesting that you should bring this up......I went to a high school that was half Jewish. Everything we learned about Israel was from the Jewish perspective and heavily biased towards the Israeli POV....which is your POV. And then yes, a few years ago I took a ME course.......it was taught by a Palestinian professor whose has lived in this country for over 30 years. Some important points I learned in the course countradicted what I had been taught growing up but was consistent with what some ex pat Israelis had told me a few years earlier [which I hadn't believed]. In addition, I was taught info that had not been included when I was growing up. And of course, I double checked the Palestinian version online. Ironically....I found that if there were any holes they were with the Israeli version/your version, and not with the Palestinian version taught by my professor. BTW I got the highest grade in the class........I really liked the class and the professor. ;-) I will take it a step further, and I would wager that the curriculum in which the "Middle East Studies" course was offered, was in part or in total funded by the Saudis. These people aren't stupid. In Arkansas, they have contributed $20 Million to fund a ME studies curriculum. Practically every major university is receiving significant money from King Fahd. Hardly. Your paranoia really fukks with your thinking.