Gender: female Member Since: March 14, 2006 Last Signed In: December 11, 2007 Profile Views: 21283 Blog Views: 74848 Bond's record-setting baseball will go into the HOF with an asterisk. "distract, delude, amuse and insulate us." People trust the Democrats more than they trust Republicans. Are you smarter than the average American? Test your knowledge of the news.. Neo-Nazi's go after the Jena 6 Feds investigating Blackwater USA for weapons smuggling The death of the History of Civilization… The good General couldn't accomplish his first job in Iraq, why should we expect anything better out of his second stint there? Support Debra Bowen's decision regarding Diebold voting machines Coast Guard's Deepwater project price skyrockets June 06 July 06 August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 November 08 Its My Right to be Left of the Center Bring it On! Sirens Chronicles 
RSS 2.0    Share!
|
|
|
There's problems in Iraq" he said, but its not a "terrible situation".
What is Dick Cheney drinking these days if he doesn’t consider the “situation” in Iraq to be terrible? Just what does it take for him to consider Iraq a terrible place? 100 dead Iraqi’s in one day must not count for anything in Dicks world. Blowing the back of the heads off of 4 American’s must not be too terrible either in Dick Cheney’s world. On CNN Cheney tried like hell to paint a rosy picture of what “we” have accomplished in Iraq. He was argumentative with Blitzer, not answering the questions put to him, just sounding like a broken record with the same rhetoric we have come to expect from this man that sits a heartbeat away from being President. When asked why he thought Hillary Clinton wouldn’t make a good president his remarks showed his ignorance and allegiance is to his party, not his country when he said:“Because she’s a Democrat.”
Now, I am not a fan of Hillary Clintons' but I do think that stating "Because she's a Democrat" is downright stupid as a rationale for why she wouldn't make a good president. Its along the lines of saying Barack Obama would make a lousy president because he is black, or John McCain would make a lousy president because he is from Arizona. Instead of providing examples to support his position that Iraq is going swimmingly, he said things like this: When Blitzer asked whether the administration’s credibility had been hurt by “the blunders and the failures” in Iraq, Cheney interjected: “Wolf, Wolf, I simply don’t accept the premise of your question. I just think it’s hogwash.” The President has admitted in two speeches lately that there have been mistakes, there have been short-sighted goals..but not Cheney. He refuses to admit to anything going wrong. Cheney’s delusional view of the war in Iraq was summed up quite well for me with this line: “Bottom line is that we’ve had enormous successes and we will continue to have enormous successes.”
Tags: Politics, Iraq, Dick Cheney 75 comments from 7 users
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 01:39 PM
National security should be our number one priority..not shoring up Iraq so the Oil companies can profit BLT. I also read today that we are going to send more troops to Afghanistan..thats great! We actually had a handle on that part of the world until we started diverting troops to Iraq.
posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Jan 25, 2007 at 01:41 PM
Ooooh Tom, that really would have pissed them off. Do that, and then ramp up the security, but not to the point of soldiers with automatic rifles walking around everywhere. That's how we "win" the war on terror folks. I really like the idea of dropping the computers everywhere with free unlimited internet access across the middle east. I think you're on to something here.
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 01:42 PM
It would have to be a soft drop Pete :P they aren't very good when they tumble from the sky...computer I mean.
posted by
TomW
on Jan 25, 2007 at 01:47 PM
Pete, I'm not sure about the ramped up security. We just need to return it to 1990's level. Our intellegence groups have been gutted, the leadership of all the alphabet agencies is all political and we're missing real threats. I am sad that people died on 9/11, but we've lost more than that trying to kill off terrorists of our own creation. Besides, what terrorist group would attack us if they thought the reaction would be we'd just become more free and welcoming? How do you terrorize someone who refuses to be afraid?BTW, the dropping of computers is just a modern spin on the US "bombing" countries with Sears catalogs. Show people what life could be like for them and let them decide. posted by
mattloch
on Jan 25, 2007 at 01:53 PM
Providing computers doesn't work too well in areas that don't have electricity, or internet access, or running water, etc., etc. For the price of Iraq we could have provided everyone computers AND electricity AND drinking water AND basic medical care. But you know, the Republican corporate sponsors had to get their kickbacks on campaign donations......
posted by
TomW
on Jan 25, 2007 at 01:58 PM
Mattloch, little creativity please. A solar laptop with a cellular connection to solar powered relays. You'd think we could develop something like this in less time for less money than we spend on a major motion picture. Heck, it wouldn't even have to be as powerful as my cellphone, and I can power that with a hand crank.
posted by
blognroll
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:00 PM
You must be a pessimist, mattloch. Instead of focusing on the part about my admiring your passion for freedom of speech, you've put all your focus on my comment that you may be living in a pre-9/11 world. All I meant by that is that you may not have a full grasp of the reality of what terrorists intend for you, me and all of our loved ones. I said you "may not," meaning it's only a hypothesis. I can't read your mind, but your statements seem to indicate that your honorable love for freedom of speech may be obfuscating your judgement as it pertains to issues of national and international security. Has the government screwed up a lot since 9/11? Sure it has. But that's no reason to return to a pre-9/11 way of looking at the world. We are all infidels in the eyes of terrorists. We are all walking around with huge targets on our backs.
posted by
randomfactor
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:00 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:02 PM
Of course we have a grasp of that. It's similar to what Bush and Company have in mind for us. A world where we're terrified of our own shadows to the point that we suspend civil liberties that have been accepted for centuries.
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:02 PM
Did anyone see the new book out by Richard Clarke? He wrote a book about what will happen if China ever gets mad enough at us to actually go all jihad on us..by cutting our communication lines..internet, etc..it would be kaos here and within our military.
posted by
mattloch
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:03 PM
Yea Tom, but electricity can also be used for things like refrigeration, powering water wells, lighting, climate control, and other things which improve standards of living and engender good will. BTW, have you heard about the $100 laptop project? I may just get one to see what it's like....
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:05 PM
Mattloch, last time I checked you were NOT a child sir :P The laptop offer does not apply to you.
posted by
mattloch
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:07 PM
Damn you Random! Beat me to the punch again..... Dusty, some of us have seen it coming (and even tried to warn people about it) for years. Except that I've seen the non-fiction articles and technical papers on cyberwarfare. (BTW, the military would be just fine. It's the civilian infrastructure that would go to hell.)
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:09 PM
Clarke says the military would take a huge hit too Mattloch. But I am just quoting him from his appearance on Countdown the other nite.
posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:10 PM
I didn't see the book dusty, but I did see that China is building their version of Las Vegas near Hong Kong. Steve Winn just finished a new casino there. One of the newer ones made it's money back in the first year! Looks like they won't need our fancy casinos anymore.
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:12 PM
I didn't know the Chinese were big on casino's Pete..thats interesting.
posted by
mattloch
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:14 PM
They plan on subsidizing the project by selling models for more than $100 here in the US and Europe to defray the costs of the models to go to developing countries, Dusty.
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:15 PM
Thats a wonderful idea Mattloch. I am glad MIT is doing this program.
posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:17 PM
Macau is where it's located.
posted by
mattloch
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:19 PM
I saw that too, Dusty. And he's right, for the areas that the military uses civilian infrastructure to conduct their "business", or where they've privatized certain aspects of their operations. But I've seen people get bent out of shape about EMP bombs as a military strategy, and completely ignore that military electronics are hardened against that specific tactic (which is why their things are so much bulkier and expensive than civilian models). Years of deep research for debate gives you insight into things like that which "normal" humans would not even think about. I just wish that I could go back to judges that gave me losses because certain scenarios were "unrealistic" and rub their noses in news stories these days......
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 02:21 PM
Its like the book 1984 Mattloch..its has come to fruition, right? Clarke's book hopefully never ever will however.
posted by
mattloch
on Jan 25, 2007 at 03:18 PM
I certainly hope not, Dusty. But I have a feeling it's like Clancy books, just far out enough to be plausible, but too far out to be realistic. ...But to mention something on your original post for this blog, I think Cheney still thinks that the situation in Iraq is subjectively bad. In his mind (and the minds of others like him, namely Rummy) there's still room for debate and interpretation. I don't think he realizes that it's objectively bad, and getting worse. I'm also not to sure he realizes that this isn't a problem that will be (or can be) solved by military force. He's still stuck in the Project for a New American Century (neo-con) thinking, namely that when we use force people will comply out of fear. He doesn't realize that there are things scarier than the US military out there on the other side that we can't "out-fear". ...An interesting plan I heard a few years back, and one that would be great to hear a presidential candidate should mention, is the idea of creating a new Department under the Executive Branch. It would be called the "Department of Peace". It's funding would start out at 1% of the funding for the Department of Defense (War, or "Love" if we're 1984) for it's first year. The second year it would get 2% of the Defense Department's funding. It would have projects like AIDS and family planning in Africa, drinking water in impoverished areas and countries, schools and basic health care in places that don't have it, etc., etc. The amount of good will that it would engender would slowly make the Defense Department unnecessary, and would grow to replace it within 100 years. Perhaps you could make a re-authorization after 20 or 25 years, just to make sure things don't move too fast (or slow) for conservatives.
posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 03:21 PM
Your probably right about the mindset of Cheney and the whole PNAC thing Mattloch. I have never heard about the Dept of Peace..I do not think the conservatives would appreciate its value however.
posted by
randomfactor
on Jan 25, 2007 at 03:34 PM
Mattloch, remember that at least one of Clancy's books involved an attack on Washington, DC where a pilot rammed a jumbo jet into a building. *BEFORE* 9/11. "But nobody could have imagined..." . Another deals with the chaos which ensues after Saddam Hussain is evicted from office (assassinated in the book) and the Iranians sweep in to take advantage of the situation. "But nobody could have imagined..." . Keep in mind that a *LARGE* part of controlling the population in "1984" is by regulating and stifling their sex lives. So every time you make the Beast With Two Backs, you're "*ing" Big Brother... posted by
dusty1215
on Jan 25, 2007 at 03:37 PM
random..I have not read many of Clancy's books. The parallels you raise are interesting..I had no idea he could see into the future! :PI have read 1984, and the irony of many of its points aren't lost on me. BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS: Loading Stories
Advertisement |
