All Hank, all the time.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
That Savimbi was supposedly fighting a civil war -- or a part one, whatever you mean by that -- doesn't mean he was using government troops, as Ty read your comment.

Ty misread my comment then. I didn't say he was using government troops. I said his effourts were part of a civil war.

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Arafat was certainly better at grabbing headlines with his terror. But I doubt he was responsible for more deaths and mutilations that either Unita or the Renamo bastards that Reagan, Helms, et al gleefully supported. After all, as Spanky would apparently have it, you can't be a terrorism if you are fighting communists.

I think Arafat is probably responsible for more civilian deaths that occured outside any field of battle. UNITA and renamo killed civilians but they were also fighting a war. Arafat hijacked cruise ships that had nothing to do with anything political and were not in Israel or even the ME and then killed civilians aboard the same. Not effect direct or immediatre change within his "country" but to black mail the international community into forcing Israel to capitulate to his demands.

There is a huge difference.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
What Penske said about Israel. DHS is a mess. It's been a mess for years. I have said this for years. In particular, it drives me nuts that they can't hire smarter people who can exercise some judgment. I have said this before, and it's still true. The fact is, it's a GOP administration and a GOP Congress that have let this happen for five years since 9/11. Now we find ourselves talking about it this week, again, for obvious reasons.

If liquid explosives are a problem, then either we should have been preventing people from carrying them on for years -- Ramzi Yousef was experimenting with them in the Phillipines before 9/11, as I recall -- or we should do something else, like make people stand in a small lead-lined room and shake their baggage vigorously before they carry them on (the liquid explosives are pretty volatile). But there is simply no fucking excuse for doing nothing for years and years and then having this fire drill this week.

And you're not even trying to defend them.

See we sort of agree on this, although one problem is the lack of willingness on the part of the American people to suffer some sacrifice. When intelligent people can bithc and moan about regulation related to bringing hand lotion on, that is indicative of a problem with perceptions and priorities. Even if some of the regs are overkill, so what?

If people are upset over a hand lotion ban, then the real security measures thsat need to be put in place will never fly. NPI. LOL.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
No, but in Penske-land she gives aid and comfort to them.


Doesn't she? Don't all Democrats?

She kissed Suha Arafat, that says something to me. Sharon was able to stand firm in his principles of not touching the filth that was Arafat, Hillary has no principles (other than self-interest) so I guess it wasn't hard for her.

Lieberman didn't, when he was a D.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
See we sort of agree on this, although one problem is the lack of willingness on the part of the American people to suffer some sacrifice. When intelligent people can bithc and moan about regulation related to bringing hand lotion on, that is indicative of a problem with perceptions and priorities. Even if some of the regs are overkill, so what?

If people are upset over a hand lotion ban, then the real security measures thsat need to be put in place will never fly. NPI. LOL.

I don't think that's quite right. People will not object to real security measures that make them safer and involve some inconvenience. Nobody really thinks that all of TSA's stupid rules and procedures make you safer.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Back on Wednesday, when Cheney was giving his briefing to reporters about how Democrats are soft on terror, were people carrying liquids onto planes?

I am not sure. I didn't fly last week, so I have no way of knowing. Any cites on this?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I agree with you. But the argument that being in Iraq is keeping us safe from attacks is ridiculous, and that is what I was questioning. While I think that Iraq has increased the numbers who would attack us, we would be getting attacked either way.

Note -- I also think that Afghanistan MAY have increased the number who would attack us, but that was worth it. Until we got distracted and fucked up an opportunity.

Again, I agree that "we can do Iraq better" is a better message. Lieberman, however, never sent that message. He was busy lauding Rummy, and taking the Admin tack of saying that anyone who questioned any element of the strategy was effectively a traitor (not his word, but close enough).

As for Lamont's "pull out" strategy, as I've said before -- I personally am at a loss for what to do in Iraq, or how we extricate ourselves from this quagmire. Yes, quagmire.

Jaysus. I agree with you again. This is weird.

1. Re the "flypaper" thing, I used to believe Iraq was a terrorist diversion, and maybe it was, but not enough to deflect all attacks from our shore. I also think the "flypaper" argument is a terrible one for the GOP because its got the necessary "we're throwing away soldiers and money we could just use to protect our own borders" rebuttal built into it.

2. I agree re Joe. He was a bad example of what the Dems ought to do. He was a bit too strident in his GOP ass-kissing. I think an honest "We have to stick it out because if Iraq falls to the Islamists, we are in deep shit" coupled with a candid explanation of how retreating from Iraq would impact fueld oil prices here would be a good way to connect with voters and appear moderate.

3. I think we should crack Iraq in 3, establish a quasi-governmental oil trust and distribute its revenues pro rata to the three nations (Sunni, Kurd, Shiite).

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Back on Wednesday, when Cheney was giving his briefing to reporters about how Democrats are soft on terror, were people carrying liquids onto planes?

Ty, you're flipping on the boat now, gasping. Penske's sucking back a Bud can and kicking your tail. I'm trying to get a hook out of my thumb in the cabin.

Let. It. Go.

Truet me. I've been where you are. In three hours, you'll be barking about why chewing gum should be banned because it could be C4.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't think that's quite right. People will not object to real security measures that make them safer and involve some inconvenience. Nobody really thinks that all of TSA's stupid rules and procedures make you safer.

I dissent. Americans are spoiled babies. For a short while in the backdrop of something big, 911 eg, they accepted some change, but the griping yesterday is indicative of the lack of ability to accept some sacrifice for higher shared concerns*. Unfortunately it will probably take a Bojinka III or suicide bombers in McDonalds in flyover land before we would accept real security changes.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Ty, you're flipping on the boat now, gasping. Penske's sucking back a Bud can and kicking your tail. I'm trying to get a hook out of my thumb in the cabin.

.

Manny's Pale Ale, on tap. But otherwise I agree.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Ty misread my comment then. I didn't say he was using government troops. I said his effourts were part of a civil war.

Huh. You think, maybe, that this could be why I told Ty that he misunderstood you?

Nah. That was just a coincidence.

I think Arafat is probably responsible for more civilian deaths that occured outside any field of battle. UNITA and renamo killed civilians but they were also fighting a war. Arafat hijacked cruise ships that had nothing to do with anything political and were not in Israel or even the ME and then killed civilians aboard the same. Not effect direct or immediatre change within his "country" but to black mail the international community into forcing Israel to capitulate to his demands.

There is a huge difference.

Unita planted landmines around wells to disrupt village life. Renamo targetted rural health clinics and schools, and focused in particular on killing teachers and medical workers. Renamo in particular was well known for cutting off arms, legs, hands of farmers and villagers who might support the government.

Renamo, morever, rarely targeted soldiers or military installations. This sets them apart even from Hamas or Hezbollah. Personally, I would not have wanted to travel in Gaza during the height of the intifada with a truckload of soldiers -- it would be like wearing a bullseye on your back. I would, however, travel with a truckload of soldiers through Mozambique, in places where Renamo was particularly active. In fact, I did.

Did Renamo and Unita blow up planes? No. How many international commercial flights do you think there were into Angola and Mozambique in the 1980s? And in any event, blowing up planes would have alienated their right-wing backers. This was not a marvel of restraint or regard for civilian life. It was a tactical choice.

How were those actions any more or less part of a war than Arafat's actions? They were not -- unless you take the position that hacking off children's arms and shooting teachers is okay so long as you claim to be fighting a civil war.

Penske, it would be pretty easy for you to acknowledge that these people were terrorists, and that they should all burn on the same plane of hell as Arafat. I don't know why you refuse to do so.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Ty, you're flipping on the boat now, gasping. Penske's sucking back a Bud can and kicking your tail. I'm trying to get a hook out of my thumb in the cabin.

Let. It. Go.

Truet me. I've been where you are. In three hours, you'll be barking about why chewing gum should be banned because it could be C4.

Your view that I'm losing this here debate would worry me more if I could figure out what the fuck you're talking about. Weekend start early?

[SlaveNoMore]

Penske_Account
WSJ and eminent ME experts, and fwiw, I'd take Plated's corroboration over most anyone on this board except maybe Spanky.

Ahem.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Huh. You think, maybe, that this could be why I told Ty that he misunderstood you?

Nah. That was just a coincidence.

.

Hmmmm, fair enough. I generally your allusions to me to be express or implied personal shots, so in that vein I misinterpreted what you were saying.

Mea culpa.

Originally posted by Sidd Finch

Penske, it would be pretty easy for you to acknowledge that these people were terrorists, and that they should all burn on the same plane of hell as Arafat. I don't know why you refuse to do so.

While I still think there was a difference between what Arafat and sAvimbi did that makes Arafat a more deplorable character, I do not have a problem saying that the people who ordered, oversaw, and took part in the civilian attacks that you noted above should burn in hell along with Arafat.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Ahem.

And Slave. I got you confused with Plated for a second.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

GOP puts a Hitler mustache on photo of Howard Dean.