Aquila Be Pssst, Al Qaeda’s leadership are Saudis and Egyptians. Just FYI. They speak Arabic in those countries. Many of them have travelled to Afghanistan and run their main operation from there. Little known fact.
What can you expect from someone who thinks that having Arabic translators in Afghanistan is something to scoff at?
He’s not scoffing at that at all. He’s simply saying that the more Arabic translators (a great many of which have been fired by this administration for various specious reasons) we have in Afghanistan, the fewer we have in Iraq, and that since there are a bunch of other languages spoken in Afghanistan, we should probably have more translators for those and fewer for Arabic. Just his opinion on how we should use our limited resources in two war areas with different needs.
He was calling Obama stupid. That’s the point. Obama was saying that Iraq is detracting from the more important front in Afghanistan. So by saying that we need more translators in Afghanistan, he is not being stupid, there is a need for Arabic translators in Afghanistan. Comparing this to the boneheadedness of Bush, is in my opinion, boneheaded. Obama is, I would argue, correct.
Cue Bushspeak: "See, back in Texas that is what ya’d call a Pinata party, we have 'em at birthdays and such. Folks gather around a big, colorful paper mache pinata, hanging down from the ceiling. They come in all kind of shapes, especially the ones you want to whack the hell out of, like a little burro, heh, heh… And ya’re blindfolded, and people spin you around and around until ya’re dizzy, and then you whack and whack at it with a big stick. Sometimes you hit it, mostly not, but when you do connect with a, gotta say here, tactical strike…with, ummm, necessary force, the pinata breaks and all this great candy falls out. The little kids really love that. It brings a smile to my face when they scoop it all up!
One time at the Ranch, on my birthday, Laura surprised me with a Turdblossom pinata. Wow! I loved that! (chuckles) I put on the blindfold, got quite a spinnin’, and went to it with a baseball bat…kept swinging, but just couldn’t connect at all…didn’t understand it… I tried and tried, but, shucks, no candy. (grins) When they took off the blindfold, turns out that Karl had the Pinata duties , and was raising it just above my reach! What a card he is at parties! We had a good laugh at it all. Where is that l’il trickster, I sure do miss him!"
If you can’t do anything about something, there’s no point in agonising over it.
If the something you can’t prevent has a certain comic charm then focus on that aspect. 
and mswas comes out with another thigh slapper. 
Yes but tradition is you lose the thread when you Godwinize. He Godwinized as president so tradition says he loses the presidency.
Btw you know who linked to Godwin’s law alot?
Hitler, and Goerge Bush Jr.
I appreciate the smiley but the something you are ‘agonising’ over has not happened yet.
In fact, I’m not really sure what you are saying.
-
Whoever gets in will not have a more intelligent foreign policy than the current Bergholt Stuttley Johnson in charge.
-
I never agonise over things like the American presidency.
I’m sorry, but the Discworld reference doesn’t keep this from being completely idiotic.
Wow, you’re a fucking moron.
If you don’t realize that Al Qaeda is a multinational organization with a heavy Arab contingent with a leadership based out of Afghanistan and Waziristan, then I guess you’re simply not worth engaging on the subject.
Because as everyone knows, the only people ever in a country are native speakers. :dubious:
Yeah, and a man with brains will sneak up behind his enemy and knife him in the back. But, in either case Bush isn’t likely to come out on top.
I do believe that there is a time where talking doesn’t accomplish anything more. If it is that important to you that a country like Iran or N. Korea doesn’t create nuclear weapons then tell them what you will do if they do so.
“If you build nuclear weapons you will be a danger to us and our allies, so we will be forced to destroy you to prevent this.” Then leave it up to them to live, or die, by their decisions.
I don’t understand why there is such a detemination to talk with crazy people who, if they had the power and the opportunity, would destroy you with little hesitation and in many cases have stated that they would do so.
We should simply create an eradication policy for Iran and North Korea specifically. Tailor each one a particular policy. They can be similar, but not the same. That if they ever use Nuclear Weapons as a first strike, we will completely remove their leadership, and ability to wage war. With North Korea that means nuking their soldiers, and with Iran that means nuking Qom, their military bases and conventional aerial bombardments of all their nuclear power plants and oil refineries. Make sure that they know we will stone-age them with no intention of rebuilding their nations in the aftermath unless shown a legitimate regime change spontaneously and of their own volition.
No Pre-Emption necessary. Show them that they cannot win by that route, and if they hold the threat of Nuclear weapons out as an option, that they know retaliation will be swift and complete.
Mutually Assured Destruction worked well against the Soviets. Why wouldn’t the threat of a one-sided destruction work on Iran and North Korea?
I had meant to start a thread in GD about this, but wasn’t, and still am not, sure on how to phrase it, or what my point would ultimately be. Most likely because I’m really afraid as to what my conclusions would have to be.
I had a conversation with a Yemeni that I work with 2 weeks ago. I proposed pretty much the same thing to him re. MAD. His response was that if they (Muslims) had a way to strike then they should (must) use it. It didn’t matter what the retaliation was or what the consequences were. They have been shamed and the only response was to strike back because of it. What shame? Well, Iraq* for one. Maybe Afghanistan. Definately Spain… Spain? Spain had once been part of Islam. He said they must retake it if for only one day and that those there would most likely be punished.
*Iraq: I asked him what he thought the reasons for the continued fighting was there. He said that the people fighting didn’t want the Americans to leave because it was easier to kill them there than to get to America to do so. Why? Well, they must get even for having outsiders come onto their lands. It will only be assauged if they see pictures of Americans being pulled through the streets behind jeeps (as in Somalia/Ethiopia(?) with the Rangers). I asked him what he thought the Americans were after being in Iraq? Afterall, look what they had done for Germany and Japan after WW2. His response was pretty much derogatory (as close as I can remember it), “Why would we want to become a nation of toy makers or electronics?”, “They have no…<waves hand dismissively>” I assume he meant honor or shame.
This was a very surprising conversation. If you knew this person you would not expect such things from him. This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this from people in the 7 years I’ve worked in Yemen, but it was the most indepth conversation I’ve had in this area. I think it is unlikely that he formed them on his own, or is the only one who thinks this way. He is well educated and cares deeply about his family which I know about because most of our conversations revolve around things that typical people talk about. He has a great sense of humour as most people do here. We even talked about how women were treated here and he thinks things must change for the better. If a guy like this thinks this way it makes me really wonder how others who are more insular, with less education and less exposure to people from the West think?
I think we in the West really underestimate the cultural differences that exist and assume that what makes sense to us makes sense to the other person.
What I loved was how the guy kept saying “He was as appeaser!” I laughed out loud while I was watching him. Is he really that ignorant or just focussed on trying to make his point?
I think he really was ignorant. He just regurgitated the far right talking points without understanding what he was talking about. It was so good to see a TV host tell one of these idiots just how clueless they are. He even compared him to the White House staffer who never heard of the Cuban missile crisis. Score one for Tweety Matthews!
Post #9.
Regards,
Shodan
Well, one of us is. You claimed Bush was responsible for a two year delay (during which the North Koreans violated the agreement they arrived at with Clinton). Then you post some stuff from six months after Bush took office, in which he states that they have to abide by their obligations under the NPT before he will begin negotiations for another treaty. Not much by way of missing an opportunity - as I mentioned, it is questionable if the US should immediately begin negotiating another treaty while the other party is violating the first one.
No doubt St. Obama will bring all this to an end with immediate, face-to-face negotiations with Kim twenty minutes after he takes office. Or else invade Pakistan. Or maybe both.
Regards,
Shodan
Wait a minute.
I said he denies that he was talking about Obama — complete with a link to his official press briefing with his official Press Secretary saying he wasn’t talking about Obama — while in private his boys in the background let the media know that Obama was indeed the target, and you say that I’m not paying attention?
Attention to what?
I’ll repeat my statement: the sack of shit lied. And I’m paying attention.