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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (46732)	10/27/2010 12:31:47 PM
From: Little Joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Well there is 60 billion a year in fraud in medicaid and the budget for Department of Education is another 60 Billion. Think of that in addition to all of the money spent by states and counties the Federal Government spends 60 Billion dollars, over a billion per State, on education, and we are I think 38th in the world are there abouts. Talk about a waste of money. lj

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (46732)	10/27/2010 7:13:10 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: [All we need to do is find about $240 Billion of savings / cost cuts per year and the federal budget (apart for interest... that will take a bit longer) can be back IN BALANCE by 2015.] "That is easy. GEt the feds out of the welfare business." Now if that Heritage study hadn't EXCLUDED all of the Corporate Welfare from their calculations we might be able to really get a grip on this 'welfare problem'....

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (46732)	10/27/2010 7:19:00 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 71588

Re: "Then we could continue to try to corral the islamic terrorists. After they secure a base of operations they become more able to project power." They ALREADY have a pretty secure base of operations (and financial support and succor for re-arming). It's called PAKISTAN. Re: "The Bush Doctrine kept us safe for years" Pretty FUNNY!!!!!!!!!!!! The "Bush Doctrine" was one of the very few good ideas to ever come out of that sad sack administration, and it was TO DAMN Bad that Bush abandoned it so very fast and refused to ever extend it's application to Pakistan! ('Cause if we had HELD PAKISTAN LIABLE AND RESPONSIBLE ten years ago, and ever since, for attacks mounted against us from their "sovereign territory" as the Bush Doctrine lays out... then we wouldn't have Afghanistan hanging like a dead albatross around our neck today....)

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (46732)	10/27/2010 7:21:52 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 71588

NATO campaign having little impact on Taliban, say US intelligence agencies The CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency reportedly say that insurgents are weathering NATO efforts by hiding in Pakistan. Terrorism and Security The Christian Science Monitor By Arthur Bright, Correspondent / October 27, 2010 csmonitor.com The Taliban and other insurgents in Afghanistan have been largely unaffected by NATO's campaign, according to assessments by US intelligence services. The Washington Post reports that the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and other US intelligence services are in broad agreement that the Taliban and the Haqqani network, an independent militant group allied with the Taliban, have suffered only minor setbacks due to NATO's campaign. A senior Defense Department official, who is involved in assessments of the war, told the Post: "The insurgency seems to be maintaining its resilience" and that Taliban elements are consistently able to "reestablish and rejuvenate," sometimes within days of being defeated by US forces. He continued to say that he couldn't see any sign of the momentum shifting. The assessments say that the Taliban's resilience is due in large part to its ability to find sanctuary in Pakistan, writes the Post. While the CIA has stepped up unmanned drone attacks in Pakistan in recent months, the Defense Department official told the Post, "For senior leadership, not much has changed. At most we are seeing lines of support disrupted, but it's temporary. They're still setting strategic guidance" for operations against coalition forces in Afghanistan. The US intelligence assessments contrast sharply with the more upbeat takes on the war made publicly by the military leaders overseeing it. Postmedia News reported Tuesday that Canadian Brig. Gen. Dean Milner said he feels NATO's efforts in Afghanistan have prompted insurgents to seek ways to reintegrate into Afghan society. "What we don't have yet — and what I want — is to start reintegration, (but) I am convinced we're getting close," added General Milner. And US Gen. Ben Hodges told The Christian Science Monitor last week that NATO forces have stabilized Kandahar City, a traditional Taliban stronghold. “The security forces are providing a level of security that is allowing [life in Kandahar City] to take place,” Hodges said. “There is a presence of security that is a lot more prevalent and reassuring than at any time in the past." The US intelligence assessments are likely to add to the international debate over how much longer the US and NATO-led mission there should go on. This year has seen the highest number of foreign troop deaths in Afghanistan since the conflict began, according to a tally by Agence France-Presse. AFP reports that the death of a NATO soldier on Wednesday brings the count this year to 603, and more than 2,170 in total. The last man to order an end to large-scale military operations in Afghanistan, Mikael Gorbachev, told the BBC that "victory is impossible in Afghanistan," and that he applauds President Obama's plan to remove troops from Afghanistan beginning next year. Mr. Gorbachev, who as leader of the former Soviet Union ordered Soviet forces out of Afghanistan more than 20 years ago, ending a 10-year war, said that the US really has no choice. "[W]hat's the alternative – another Vietnam? Sending in half a million troops? That wouldn't work."