Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

[Urbane Guerrilla]

As you see. And I never bluster, but pop heads like zits, in those instances where they only contain pus.

Marichiko, whatever her virtues may be, is older than I am, which is old enough to know better -- and she doesn't.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

This is not well thought out. What is here instead is an expression of prejudice -- your unjustified belief that conservatives must somehow never be intellectuals. Commentary, The World Jewish Review, and National Review all demonstrate just how unjustified that view is, monthly or quarterly.

I didn't make any claims about intelligence, just about open-mindedness. There are perfectly rational intellectuals who believe that the world is less than 6000 years old.

[tw]

Originally Posted by richlevy

I think what persuaded him was the idea that to support a war in 3 countries would mean reinstating the draft, which would have finally brought the cost of war home to the American people.

There appears to be other factors that recently changed George Jr's attitude. We heard it in comments about learning humility. Forgot the exact text, but he almost apologized for the "Bring it on" statement and then moved on to express how he needed to become more mature.

But I think there are some other factors here. Some of Cheney's responses lately may be put him at loggerhead with Karl Rove. George Jr may not be taking orders from Cheney anymore. I also got a very distinct impression that Laura laid into him about his cowboy attitudes. I think maybe his low popularity ratings finally got Laura to tell George off - to get him to take stock of his attitude.

And finally, I believe Condi Rice is getting educated by State Department veterans and world leaders. This too would be influencing how George Jr reacts. Condi is saying things she would have never said three and four years ago.

Of course underlying all this are the lowest popularity polls in recent history. It's hard to believe that Richard Nixon all but openly tried to pervert this nation's government and still did not have such low numbers. Apparently that may have finally caused George Jr to take a realistic world perspective.

[Pie]

Originally Posted by tw

If a communist operation, then you must get a boss (and maybe his boss) to approve a new drill bit. Communism. In a free market operation, you make the decision to buy and order a new drill bit. The company automatically pays without question because you are now responsible.

I don't know what kind of company you work for -- my boss' boss does sign for the 50-cent purchases. Actually, most of the time, he vetos them. Bastard.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Nah, we're both married, to other people. :p IIRC.

UG is married, I am on the market.

But I do like him, in a way that cannot be used against him in a divorce proceeding, AFAIK.

[tw]

Stock brokers are crying that interest rates are too high; will create recession. Fools. Recession in inevitable due to an administration that spends money on wars, tax cuts, a corporate welfare like the top man was an alcoholic. Too much money overseas. Unacceptable trade imbalances. But worst of all, a government so fiscally irresponsible as to not even put the Mission Accomplished war in the budget - because you might really see those costs.

Originally Posted by tw

Ahh, but Cheney told us that "Reagan proved deficiets don't matter".

Top 10 PBGC (government) rescues of corporations and their dates. Notice who is doing most of it - and larger *rescues* are coming:

1. United Airlines $6.6 bln 2005
2. Bethlehem Steel $3.7 bln 2003
3. US Airways $3.0 bln 2003, 2005
4. LTV Steel $2.0 bln 2002
5. National Steel $1.1 bln 2002
6. Pan American Air $841 mln 1991
7. Weirton Steel $689 mln 2004
8. TWA $668 mln 2001
9. Kaiser Aluminum $566 mln 2004
10. Eastern Airlines $553 mln 1991

But it has only started. A government that does believe deficits don't matter. Financial responsiblity is for the foolish? From CBSMarketWatch of 20 Jun 2006 are some interesting quotes:

U.S. pension peril grows with bankruptcies
Originally the PBGC aimed to protect workers' pensions from corporate meltdowns. Thirty-two years later, it has become a tool for executives trying to ease long-term burdens on companies working to get out of bankruptcy. ...

Created in 1974 by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the PBGC gets most of its money from premiums paid by companies supporting pension plans. But there are no accounting rules requiring those plans be fully funded. ...

"The PBGC was put together to handle normal risks," said Olivia Mitchell, a professor at The Wharton School and director of the Boettner Center for Pensions and Retirement Research at the University of Pennsylvania. "I don't think anybody really expected ... there would be entire swathes of American industry that would have the bottom fall out."

Which is precisely what happened to the steel and airlines industries. There are now fears a similar fate might befall the struggling U.S. auto industry, another huge employer. ...

"The bottom line here is we're talking about a taxpayer bailout," said David John, a Heritage Foundation researcher. "It's inevitable."

Remember this is the same president who wanted to change Social Security on some myth that SS has problems. In reality, the only problem with SS is that George Jr's administration takes money out of SS to pay for things like a Mission Accomplished War, and leaves no IOU.

Why then was he not concerned about a far more serious problem - PBGC? The solution was simple if performed years ago. Require PBGC corporations to fully fund their pension funds. But then GM would have to admit financal problems long before those problems became worse. Its easier when a public believes myths of WMDs; to also pretend a PBGC problem does not exist. Then when resulting recessionary forces strike, others will be blamed. Mental midget is not so dumb; is he? He knows who remains in denial - and it's not the president.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

There are perfectly rational intellectuals who believe that the world is less than 6000 years old.

Perfectly rational? No, sir. "Not clinically insane" is about as far as I can go. "Uninformed" is another adjective that comes to mind.

[tw]

From the Washington Post of 24 July 2006:

'It Looked Weird and Felt Wrong'

From its first days in Iraq in April 2003, the Army's 4th Infantry Division made an impression on soldiers from other units -- the wrong one.

"We slowly drove past 4th Infantry guys looking mean and ugly," recalled Sgt. Kayla Williams, then a military intelligence specialist in the 101st Airborne. "They stood on top of their trucks, their weapons pointed directly at civilians. . . . What could these locals possibly have done? Why was this intimidation necessary? No one explained anything, but it looked weird and felt wrong."

Today, the 4th Infantry and its commander, Maj. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, are best remembered for capturing former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, one of the high points of the U.S. occupation. But in the late summer of 2003, as senior U.S. commanders tried to counter the growing insurgency with indiscriminate cordon-and-sweep operations, the 4th Infantry was known for aggressive tactics that may have appeared to pacify the northern Sunni Triangle in the short term but that, according to numerous Army internal reports and interviews with military commanders, alienated large parts of the population.

Actions by the 4th ID were on paper (the short term perspective) some of the best in Iraq. However the article demonstrates why the 4th ID may have done more than any other unit to create the insurgency. Also called a 'big dic' attitude.

Officially, the insurgency probably started 7 Aug 2003 with a bombing of the Jordanian Embassy. Recently, the civil war may be defined when Sunnis entered a Shi'ite town, lined up all the residents, and massacred them. Currently about 3000 Iraqis are being murdered this way - more the instability directly traceable to an American that even insisted there was no looting.

This was how Lebanon's civil war started. This is but again what America created by violating basic military doctrine from 500 BC. We disbanded the police and army because Bremmer and White House extremists did not even understand basic military science principles. But then where was the president when basic military doctrine was being taugh to his National Guard unit?

This and following Washington Post articles cite confidential military studies that demontrate why we are losing a "Mission Accomplished" war. I will not even attempt to highlight this article because it contains numerous fundamental points that every citizen should understand - some concepts having been posted previously even in The Cellar.

Military experts now say we will probably need at least 100,000 troops in Iraq even 10 to 15 years from now. Deja vue Vietnam.

[tw]

From the Washington Post of 23 July 2006:

In Iraq, Military Forgot Lessons of Vietnam
On May 16, 2003, L. Paul Bremer III, the chief of the Coalition Provisional Authority, the U.S.-run occupation agency, had issued his first order, "De-Baathification of Iraq Society." The CIA station chief in Baghdad had argued vehemently against the radical move, contending: "By nightfall, you'll have driven 30,000 to 50,000 Baathists underground. And in six months, you'll really regret this."

He was proved correct, as Bremer's order, along with a second that dissolved the Iraqi military and national police, created a new class of disenfranchised, threatened leaders.

Exacerbating the effect of this decision were the U.S. Army's interactions with the civilian population.

Some here in the Cellar insisted that Iraqis welcomed Americans. When that Saddam statue was brought down, those in denial refused to acknowledge a damning fact - almost no Iraqis in the street because Americans were not welcome. The fact did not jib with their propaganda. So they falsely insist the majority of Iraqis still feared to be in the streets. Instead they believed the George Jr / Rush Limbaugh lies. Few Iraqis were in that plaza pulling down Saddam's statue because:

Few U.S. soldiers seemed to understand the centrality of Iraqi pride and the humiliation Iraqi men felt in being overseen by this Western army. Foot patrols in Baghdad were greeted during this time with solemn waves from old men and cheers from children, but with baleful stares from many young Iraqi men.

How deep is denial of reality then as it remains today within the mental midget president?

Complicating the U.S. effort was the difficulty top officials had in recognizing what was going on in Iraq. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld at first was dismissive of the looting that followed the U.S. arrival and then for months refused to recognize that an insurgency was breaking out there. A reporter pressed him one day that summer: Aren't you facing a guerrilla war?

"I guess the reason I don't use the phrase 'guerrilla war' is because there isn't one," Rumsfeld responded.

Senior U.S. intelligence officers in Iraq later estimated that about 85 percent of the tens of thousands rounded up were of no intelligence value. But as they were delivered to the Abu Ghraib prison, they overwhelmed the system and often waited for weeks to be interrogated, during which time they could be recruited by hard-core insurgents, who weren't isolated from the general prison population.

How easy do we recruit for the insurgency? We even tortured and called that good. Some in the Cellar even deny anything wrong with toture. Deja vue. We now see what torture caused - another problem directly traceable to the George Jr administration that openly advocates both torture and extraordinary rendition. These are crimes worthy of impeachment.

That summer, retired Marine Col. Gary Anderson, an expert in small wars, was sent to Baghdad by the Pentagon to advise on how to better put down the emerging insurgency. He met with Bremer in early July. "Mr. Ambassador, here are some programs that worked in Vietnam," Anderson said.

It was the wrong word to put in front of Bremer. "Vietnam?" Bremer exploded, according to Anderson. "Vietnam! I don't want to talk about Vietnam. This is not Vietnam. This is Iraq!"

This was one of the early indications that U.S. officials would obstinately refuse to learn from the past as they sought to run Iraq.

Deja Vue Vietnam. I was posting it how long ago? Long before we 'Pearl Harbored' Iraq. Anyone want to acknowledge how predictable this all was because someone first learned history - ie read the Pentagon Papers?

Is Iraq in civil war? Priniciples from previous civil wars to define when that war started now exist in Iraq. Only time will tell whether Iraq gets worse because we invaded iraq as Israel invaded Lebanon. An invasion justified by lies at the highest level of government, without a strategic objective, and therefore has no exit strategy. Deja vue Vietnam.

[Undertoad]

The insurgency dwindles as it is hit, but it is replaced with sectarian violence which kills many more people. This is the civil war that Michael Yon predicted... not very pretty.

[tw]

Clearly we are winning hearts and minds in Afghanistan - every night. From the Washington Post of 8 Aug 2006:

Kabul Wilts Under Power Cuts
The energy crisis has focused growing anger at the government of President Hamid Karzai, who last year appointed a former militia leader and governor with no technical experience as minister of energy and water. Many Kabul residents say they do not understand why, nearly five years after the overthrow of Taliban rule, and with the influx of millions of dollars in foreign aid, the government cannot even light the capital.

Even in more affluent neighborhoods, city-supplied electricity has been reduced this year from about 23 hours a day to five hours every other night. Families cram all their cooking, washing and studying into short, frustrating stints under a couple of dim bulbs.

Officials here say the cause of the shortage is an antiquated urban infrastructure, damaged by years of war, that has failed to keep up with the power demands of a city population that has swelled from half a million when the Taliban were overthrown to nearly 4 million today ...

"I remember before the civil war, we had power 24 hours a day. Now we can't even make tea or keep the clothes clean, and I have to send my daughter out for gas so we can cook dinner on a burner," said Faiz Murza, 62, a retired importer who lives in Kabul's Old City, a district of once-elegant homes ruined by war.

Saddam could provide electricity 24 hours every day in Iraq with antiquated infrastructure and while under a decade long embargo. Taliban could provide electricity 24 hours in Afghanistan. George Jr administration - after five years of 'reconstructiion' - those hours of electricity have dropped from 24 to only five hours.

Just another way to recruit centrists into the ranks of extremists - also called nationalists. No wonder so many American troops must stay another four months in Baghdad - where we are winning the war - just like in Vietnam.

Not only did we not bring in enough troops and do virtually no reconstruction. We cannot even provide enough kilowatts. But kilowatts are so easily produced even with antiquated equipment. Saddam could do it. Taliban could do it. God's chosen president could not?

[tw]

From EE Times of 31 July 2006

Quashed report tracks design exodus
A controversial report suppressed for two years by the Bush administration provides what critics claim is the most exhaustive look yet at the outsourcing of U.S. high-tech jobs. The congressionally mandated report, compiled by the Commerce Department's Technology Administration, also contains stark predictions about the future of U.S. chip design as many more U.S. engineering jobs emigrate to low-cost locations like India.

The 356-page report--details of which were first reported last week by the newsletter Manufacturing & Technology News--was written in July 2004. But it was withheld during a presidential election year, after political wrangling between the White House and Democrats on the House Science Committee failed to reach a compromise on terms of its release. A 12-page summary published at the time omitted many of the final report's controversial findings. This spring, Science Committee members finally reached a deal to pressure the Bush administration to release the full report.

[Hippikos]

Ending the Neocon Nightmare

Witnessing the near-perfect symmetry of Israeli and American policy has been one of the more noteworthy aspects of the latest Lebanon war. A true friend in the White House. No deescalate and stabilize, honest-broker, diplomatic jaw-jaw from this president. Great. Except that Israel was actually in need of an early exit strategy, had its diplomatic options narrowed by American weakness and marginalization in the region, and found itself ratcheting up aerial and ground operations in ways that largely worked to Hezbollah's advantage, the Qana tragedy included. The American ladder had gone AWOL.

More worrying, while everyone here can identify an Israeli interest in securing the northern border and the justification in responding to Hezbollah, the goal of saving Lebanon's fragile Cedar Revolution sounds less distinctly Israeli. Perhaps an agenda invented elsewhere. As hostilities intensified, the phrase "proxy war" gained resonance.

Israelis have grown used to a different kind of American embrace - less instrumental, more emotional, but also responsible. A dependable friend, ready to lend a guiding hand back to the path of stabilization when necessary.

Beyond that, Israel and its friends in the United States should seriously reconsider their alliances not only with the neocons, but also with the Christian Right. The largest "pro-Israel" lobby day during this crisis was mobilized by Pastor John Hagee and his Christians United For Israel, a believer in Armageddon with all its implications for a rather particular end to the Jewish story. This is just asking to become the mother of all dumb, self-defeating and morally abhorrent alliances.

Internationalist Republicans, Democrats and mainstream Israelis must construct an alternative narrative to the neocon nightmare, identifying shared interests in a policy that reestablishes American leadership, respect and credibility in the region by facilitating security and stability, pursuing conflict resolution and promoting the conditions for more open societies (as opposed to narrow election-worship). The last two years of the Bush presidency can be an opportunity for progress or an exercise in desperate damage limitation. It sounds counter-intuitive, but Israel should reflect on and even help reorient American expectations.

[9th Engineer]

Israel does have enemies, interests and security imperatives, but there is no logic in the country volunteering itself for the frontline of an ideologically misguided and avoidable war of civilizations.

Ideologically misguided?? You won't find the ideology coming from Israel, they just finally hit their braking point. Would you really prefer to see Israel forced to retreat and the whole process to begin all over? If they did that all that would happen would be that Hezbollah would be screaming about how powerful and great they are to have defeated the Israeli infidels. That entire 20 mile region should be turned into an uninhabitable wasteland, a proper retribution for all these years of bombings. Next time a group of terrorists starts getting any ideas about strapping on the explosives again all Israel needs to do is run some photos of the devastation on the news with the caption "think hard first".

[Hippikos]

You won't find the ideology coming from Israel

That ideology is called "Zionism".

Perhaps three-quarters of Israelis and Palestinians are eager for peace and compromise, while a quarter on each side – often fueled by extreme religious zeal – wants a complete victory over the other. Radical Palestinians want to destroy Israel, while radical Israelis demand control over the entire West Bank, through either continued occupation or even (according to a tiny minority) a forcible removal of the Palestinian population.

Every time when peace appears to be close at hand, radicals on one side of the conflict or the other provoke an explosion to derail it. Sometimes this involves overt conflict between moderates and radicals within one side, such as when an Israeli religious zealot assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin when peace negotiations were making progress. Sometimes this involves a terrorist attack by radical Palestinians against Israeli civilians, in the hope of provoking an exaggerated violent response from Israel that breaks the process of trust building among moderates on both sides.

Both sides should agree to the pre-1967 boundaries in principle, and then swap small land parcels and definitions of control (especially regarding Jerusalem) in slight and mutually convenient deviations from the 1967 boundaries.

In other words, quibbling over details should come after both sides agree on the principle of respect for the pre-1967 borders, which are recognized by key countries throughout the region and around the world, and are enshrined in numerous UN resolutions.

N-Ireland somehow found a way out of the quigmire. Not by bombing Ireland or the UK, but by negotiation, even if that means that one need to talk to (former) terrorists..