Results tagged “diplomacy” from onegoodmove

Psycho George

George Bush is a stupid motherfucker. There is no other way to put it. Who in their right mind encourages people to exercise strenuously in 100 degree temperatures. Is he trying to kill the staff? Does he have any idea how dangerous that is? Isn't there anyone there who understands the fucking risk. Unbelievable.

NPR : A 'Pant-Out' with the '100-Degree Club'

President Bush spent his afternoon not buried in Middle East diplomacy, but daring his staff at the ranch to join what he calls the "100-degree club." The phrase literally sends shudders down staffers' spines. The president challenged White House employees to run three miles in the central Texas heat across the scrubby terrain on his property.

Those finishing the three miles got a T-shirt from the president. Mr. Bush did the course on his bike (his bad knees prevent him from running these days), but rode back to join the runners as they came in. I'm told the president was friendly and encouraging in the most fatherly way -- as he pedaled around the sweaty troops. According to the Weather Channel, the temperature on this patch of Texas was exactly 100 degrees when the run took place. The heat index was 102.


A google search of the White House web site makes it clear that the government is giving away "secret" programs faster than the New York Times. I was in the process of collecting examples of George spilling the beans, for instance President Announces Crackdown on Terrorist Financial Network

Today, we are taking another step in our fight against evil.  We are setting down two major elements of the terrorists international financial network, both at home and abroad.  Ours is not a war just of soldiers and aircraft.  It's a war fought with diplomacy, by the investigations of law enforcement, by gathering intelligence and by cutting off the terrorists' money.— George W. Bush, November 7, 2001
MSNBC has finished the job. Keith Olbermanm does the honors.

Quicktime Video MB
Quicktime 7 required
Countdown with Keith Olbermann
Related: Mad Kane has a limerick on the topic.

All Hell Breaks Loose

Jean Schmidt a nutcase said, "He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that cowards cut and run, Marines never do...".

Click on the picture to play the video
Quicktime Video 9.7 MB 6'53
Quicktime Required

Related: Uproar in House

The Republicans pulled what is charitably called a cheap stunt. They introduced a resolution. The "Hunter" resolution in an attempt to embarrass the Democrats. The claim was that it was what Murtha had proposed, it wasn't since they had removed key language from Murtha's resolution, namely as soon as it's practicable. Murtha had proposed a planned withdrawal beginning immediately the Republicans proposed leaving at first light. During the debate the Republicans tried to leave the impression that they were debating Murtha's resolution when they were really debating the sham Hunter resolution. In this clip the Democrats are trying to make that clear. The outrage comes when the speaker tries to blur the line once again. A little theater of the absurd, but quite entertaining

Click on the picture to play the video
Quicktime Video 3.2MB 2'09
Quicktime Required

Check out the two resolutions in the extended entry.

Continue reading "All Hell Breaks Loose" »

Kerry Outlines His National Security Strategy

John Kerry has started a series of speeches that outline his national security strategy. He argues that the Bush administration has moved away from Theodore Roosevelt's "speak softly and carry a big stick." Roosevelt said, "If a man continually blusters, if he lacks civility, a big stick will not save him from trouble." It is a good start but I believe it is only half a policy. It is too defense oriented. We need to proactively root out the hate that causes terrorism, not just treat the symptoms with a strong military and powerful friends.

Kerry says he will follow Roosevelt's time honored advice and has outlined a four part national security policy.

It�s time for a new national security policy guided by four new imperatives: First, we must launch and lead a new era of alliances for the post 9-11 world. Second, we must modernize the world�s most powerful military to meet the new threats. Third, in addition to our military might, we must deploy all that is in America�s arsenal -- our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas. Fourth and finally, to secure our full independence and freedom, we must free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil.

The first point is very welcome indeed. It will be a difficult task after what Bush has done to America's credibility. The second imperative is also a great idea. We have a military designed to fight large cold-war style battles. We have new enemies and this requires new military capabilities.

I will modernize our military to match its new missions. We must get the most out of new technologies. We must reform training and update the way we structure our armed forces -- for example, with special forces designed to strike terrorists in their sanctuaries, and with national guard and reserve units retooled to meet the requirements of homeland defense.

The third point is also important. It appears Kerry will actually hold the intelligence community accountable for its failures. Finally, a new energy policy is badly needed not just for national security, but also to protect the environment. Kerry plans to offer tax credits to consumers who use alternative energy sources.

These are all good ideas, but Kerry doesn't even mention the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Our uneven treatment in favor of Israel is the root of hatred for the United States in the middle east. This hatred is the fuel for groups like Al Qaeda. Terrorism will never end if we cannot solve the conflicts that generate it. We may stop more terrorists with a properly equiped military and international cooperation, but there will always be a few that make it through our defenses. No defense is perfect. If we truly want to cure the world of terrorism, we have to treat the cause not just the symptoms. We need a security policy that focuses on ways to achieve peace, not just better ways to wage war.

Needless War

Edward Kennedy spoke at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington on March 5 on the subject of the war in Iraq, a needless war. It is an eloquent statement of what went wrong and why, and where the responsibility lies. He accuses the president of "pure, unadulterated fear-mongering" It has all been said before but never better. This is our history let us learn from it.

Thank you, Glenn Kessler, for that generous introduction. As you all know, Glenn does an outstanding job covering diplomacy and foreign policy for The Washington Post.

It's a privilege to be here today with the Council on Foreign Relations. The Council and its members have a distinguished record of notable contributions to the national debate over the years. On the most important foreign policy issues confronting our nation and the world, the Council is at the forefront. Your views and analyses are more important than ever today, as America tries to find its way in this vastly transformed modern world.

The nation is engaged in a major ongoing debate about why America went to war in Iraq, when Iraq was not an imminent threat, had no nuclear weapons, no persuasive links to Al Qaeda, no connection to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, and no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

Over two centuries ago, John Adams spoke eloquently about the need to let facts and evidence guide actions and policies. He said, "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." Listen to those words again, and you can hear John Adams speaking to us now about Iraq. "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

Tragically, in making the decision to go to war in Iraq, the Bush administration allowed its wishes, its inclinations, and its passions to alter the state of facts and the evidence of the threat we faced from Iraq.

Continue reading "Needless War" »

The Truth Will Emerge

The Truth Will Emerge
by US Senator Robert Byrd
Senate Floor Remarks - May 21, 2003

"Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again, - -
The eternal years of God are hers;
But Error, wounded, writhes in pain,
And dies among his worshippers."

Truth has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to obscure it. Distortion only serves to derail it for a time. No matter to what lengths we humans may go to obfuscate facts or delude our fellows, truth has a way of squeezing out through the cracks, eventually.

But the danger is that at some point it may no longer matter. The danger is that damage is done before the truth is widely realized. The reality is that, sometimes, it is easier to ignore uncomfortable facts and go along with whatever distortion is currently in vogue. We see a lot of this today in politics. I see a lot of it -- more than I would ever have believed -- right on this Senate Floor.

Continue reading "The Truth Will Emerge" »


Even if the sovereignty of unwilling nations be outraged

By Stephen Gowans

George W. Bush's September 20, 2002 National Security Strategy begins with a bold declaration: There is, it says, "a single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy and free enterprise." Declaring free enterprise to be a summum bonum is a rather odd way to set out on the task of putting forward a plan to safeguard the security of a nation, if "nation" is taken to comprise the 300 million or so people who claim US citizenship. For whatever has free enterprise -- or Bush's commitment, set out in the same document, to "actively work to markets and free trade to every corner of the world" -- to do with safeguarding the personal safety of ordinary Americans?

The answer, according to Bush, is that poor countries are hospitable hosts for terrorist networks. "Poverty does not make people into terrorists," he says, but "poverty...can make weak states vulnerable to terrorist networks." And since "[f]ree trade and free markets have proven their ability to lift whole societies out of poverty," solving the problem of terrorism means imposing the single sustainable model of free trade and free markets on countries whose poverty is the fertile soil in which terrorist networks are able to put down roots, or so the argument goes.

To say there are a few problems with Bush's formulation is to understate the obvious. For one, it's not clear how much more free trade and free enterprise a desperately poor country like Haiti can withstand, before the word "desperation" becomes too mild a description of the straitened circumstances under which the island's residents subsist. And Central America has a long history of free trade and free markets (imposed by US gunboat diplomacy), and nothing to show for it, but misery, poverty and unrelenting strife. But American corporations, among them United Fruit, have profited handsomely from a model of free trade and free markets that--while not lifting Central Americans out of poverty--has certainly kept the profit margins of US firms with stakes in the region agreeably large.

Continue reading "Sovereignty" »