Richard Clarke: Bush Admin Negligent in Antiterrorism

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by SpencerH
such as?

Lets just stoke the fires a little (and yes I'm serious)

Being caught with thier pants down wrt nuke testing by India and Pakistan.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Agathon
Che. If Bush does get re-elected fairly will you take it as evidence that democracy is dead and that it's time for armed revolt.

So if someone you dislike is elected to a position you think they shouldn't hold, you believe that it is time to wage war on the populace that elected him? And you're the one mourning the death of democracy?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Its only democracy if he says it is.

[GePap]

Originally posted by SpencerH
I dont have time to read it in depth just now. Just skim reading, I've spotted enough outright lies in the text to figure which way it goes though.

Hey. like when I read the Boortz piece-only Blumenthal's piece is better writen and seemingly researched as well.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
So if someone you dislike is elected to a position you think they shouldn't hold, you believe that it is time to wage war on the populace that elected him? And you're the one mourning the death of democracy?

Don't misrepresent me. If this corrupt, lying, incompetent bunch get re-elected, then it would show that democracy doesn't work.

The facts are that they are bent, are liars, and are incompetent. That much is obvious.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Agathon


Don't misrepresent me.

I'm not misrepresenting you or your views. That's exactly what you said.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by GePap


Hey. like when I read the Boortz piece-only Blumenthal's piece is better writen and seemingly researched as well.

In fairness Boortz doesn't represent himself as a serious journalist more of an entertainer with salient insight.

Besides he pwns Blumenthal.

[GePap]

:yawn:

[Agathon]

You guys are a joke. You lost this debate a long time ago. The lefties have been proved right time and time again, and yet you still bleat on as if nothing has happened.

Do you live in a cave or something?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Nope in a Democracy where we get to express our oh so correct opinion.

[DinoDoc]

Agathon doesn't believe in democracy.

[Agathon]

Not if it doesn't work. Look at the Bush record.

1. A completely irresponsible fiscal policy. It's customary that if you are going to cut taxes, that you make sure that you cut spending or find some other way to pay for it - rather than just sitting with a finger up your arse hoping it will work itself out.

2. A war based on lies that has cost the US most of its "soft power" (badly needed to fight terrorism) and mired it in a farcical situation in Iraq.

3. An idiotic and pugnacious unilateralist policy with regard to things like Kyoto and the Landmine treaty when a softer approach would probably have been better for the US in the long term (another "soft power" issue). There are ways and means to get your own way that are less damaging than riding into down firing off a pair of six shooters.

4. Pointless and irresponsible public threats issued against North Korea and Iran, which appear to have served no useful purpose other than to antagonize those regimes and other affected parties.

5. A lassez-faire attitude towards the Israel/Palestine conflict, which is the most inflammatory issue w/regard to the causes of terrorism. Bush has made Clinton's spotty record in this area look like the work of a Metternich or a Castlereagh.

6. The worst job creation record in US history allied with a belated and weak response to an egregious corporate crime spree.

7. All you former friends (except Israel) hate you.

It's like some terrible cartoon for God's sake.

You don't have to be a radical communist to object to this, as rumblings from traditional conservatives show. Look, I didn't like Bush senior, but I respected him as a politician and a diplomat - same goes for Clinton. But this lot are irresponsible and incompetent. I remember watching Bush senior address the world before Gulf War I. In my opinion that was largely a BS war, but I could not but help admire the skill and patience with which Bush rallied people to his cause. Junior's idea is to throw a tantrum if other countries disagree.

After GWI Bush could visit any number of Western countries and receive a warm welcome. Clinton was idolized when he came to NZ. Bush can't come to Canada because half the country would turn out to boo him and his last visit to Britain was a stage managed farce.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Being caught with thier pants down wrt nuke testing by India and Pakistan.

Sorry, I dont know what you're referring to.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by GePap


Hey. like when I read the Boortz piece-only Blumenthal's piece is better writen and seemingly researched as well.

I havent read the Boortz piece. In a place far far away and a time long gone I learned that if a pundit said the sky was blue I'd go outside to take a look. No one is more cynical on these issues than I.

MY wife wants this PC so I dont have time to blitz the Blumenthal piece now :whipped:

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Agathon
Not if it doesn't work. Look at the Bush record.

1. A completely irresponsible fiscal policy. It's customary that if you are going to cut taxes, that you make sure that you cut spending or find some other way to pay for it - rather than just sitting with a finger up your arse hoping it will work itself out.

2. A war based on lies that has cost the US most of its "soft power" (badly needed to fight terrorism) and mired it in a farcical situation in Iraq.

3. An idiotic and pugnacious unilateralist policy with regard to things like Kyoto and the Landmine treaty when a softer approach would probably have been better for the US in the long term (another "soft power" issue). There are ways and means to get your own way that are less damaging than riding into down firing off a pair of six shooters.

4. Pointless and irresponsible public threats issued against North Korea and Iran, which appear to have served no useful purpose other than to antagonize those regimes and other affected parties.

5. A lassez-faire attitude towards the Israel/Palestine conflict, which is the most inflammatory issue w/regard to the causes of terrorism. Bush has made Clinton's spotty record in this area look like the work of a Metternich or a Castlereagh.

6. The worst job creation record in US history allied with a belated and weak response to an egregious corporate crime spree.

7. All you former friends (except Israel) hate you.

It's like some terrible cartoon for God's sake.

You don't have to be a radical communist to object to this, as rumblings from traditional conservatives show. Look, I didn't like Bush senior, but I respected him as a politician and a diplomat - same goes for Clinton. But this lot are irresponsible and incompetent. I remember watching Bush senior address the world before Gulf War I. In my opinion that was largely a BS war, but I could not but help admire the skill and patience with which Bush rallied people to his cause. Junior's idea is to throw a tantrum if other countries disagree.

After GWI Bush could visit any number of Western countries and receive a warm welcome. Clinton was idolized when he came to NZ. Bush can't come to Canada because half the country would turn out to boo him and his last visit to Britain was a stage managed farce.

P-r-o-v-e I-t. For once prove what you are saying, this typical bullshit won't cut it.

[rev]

Ah, the scent of irony is thick in the proverbial air.

[Kidicious]

I expected this from Fez, but some of the rest of you conservatives, I'm actually suprized at.

[Giancarlo]

I want to see Richard Clarke in jail for perjury, that is all.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Giancarlo: Hypothetical situation... what would you do if Kerry wins?

That's incredibly hypothetical and not even .5% likely.

[Ramo]

Excellent analysis from Kaplan:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2097685/

I have no doubt that Richard Clarke, the former National Security Council official who has launched a broadside against President Bush's counterterrorism policies, is telling the truth about every single charge. There are three reasons for this confidence.

First, his basic accusations are consistent with tales told by other officials, including some who had no significant dealings with Clarke.

Second, the White House's attempts at rebuttal have been extremely weak and contradictory. If Clarke were wrong, one would expect the comebacks—especially from Bush's aides, who excel at the counterstrike—to be stronger and more substantive.

Continue Article

Third, I went to graduate school with Clarke in the late 1970s, at MIT's political science department, and called him as an occasional source in the mid-'80s when he was in the State Department and I was a newspaper reporter. There were good things and dubious things about Clarke, traits that inspired both admiration and leeriness. The former: He was very smart, a highly skilled (and utterly nonpartisan) analyst, and he knew how to get things done in a calcified bureaucracy. The latter: He was arrogant, made no effort to disguise his contempt for those who disagreed with him, and blatantly maneuvered around all obstacles to make sure his views got through.

The key thing, though, is this: Both sets of traits tell me he's too shrewd to write or say anything in public that might be decisively refuted. As Daniel Benjamin, another terrorism specialist who worked alongside Clarke in the Clinton White House, put it in a phone conversation today, "Dick did not survive and flourish in the bureaucracy all those years by leaving himself open to attack."

Clarke did suffer one setback in his 30-year career in high office, though he doesn't mention it in his book. James Baker, the first President Bush's secretary of state, fired Clarke from his position as director of the department's politico-military bureau. (Bush's NSC director, Brent Scowcroft, hired him almost instantly.) I doubt we'll be hearing from Baker on this episode: He fired Clarke for being too close to Israel—not a point the Bush family's political savior is likely to make in an election season. (For details on this unwritten chapter and on why Clarke hasn't talked to me for over 15 years, click here.)

[Giancarlo]

How is he telling the truth when evidence points to the contradictions in his testimony? Something tells me that article is full of bullshit.

[Ramo]

What evidence?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ramo
What evidence?

Do you even bother looking at any of the articles the conservatives post here?

[rev]

Link a few of 'em. I'll read 'em and tell you what I honestly think. I don't doubt there are smart conservatives, here and out there, and maybe they're right about Clarke -- I just haven't heard their case.

Wanna throw some articles my way?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by rev
Link a few of 'em. I'll read 'em and tell you what I honestly think. I don't doubt there are smart conservatives, here and out there, and maybe they're right about Clarke -- I just haven't heard their case.

Wanna throw some articles my way?

Look through the pages of this thread. I am not going through 8 pages right now.

[Berzerker]

So if someone you dislike is elected to a position you think they shouldn't hold, you believe that it is time to wage war on the populace that elected him? And you're the one mourning the death of democracy?

Ouch!

Agathon doesn't believe in democracy.

Me neither, just took Aggie a bit longer to see the truth.

Agathon -

Not if it doesn't work.

Aren't you a communist?

[Ramo]

You mean the Boortz article? As has been pointed out, he was working for the Bush Administration. If he were critical, he'd get fired.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


P-r-o-v-e I-t. For once prove what you are saying, this typical bullshit won't cut it.

Try watching the news for a change.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Agathon


Try watching the news for a change.

TheLeftWingBullshitSite doesn't count as news.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Fez
You guys are a joke. You lost this debate a long time ago. The righties have been proved right time and time again, and yet you still bleat on as if nothing has happened.

Do you live in a cave or something?