Kerry On Lebanon: "If I Was President, This Wouldn't Have Happened."

[BPSCG]

"If I was (sic) president, this wouldn't have happened," said Kerry during a noon stop at Honest John's bar and grill in Detroit's Cass Corridor.No word on how much he'd had to drink.
Bush has been so concentrated on the war in Iraq that other Middle East tension arose as a result, he said.

"The president has been so absent on diplomacy when it comes to issues affecting the Middle East," Kerry said. "We're going to have a lot of ground to make up (in 2008) because of it."

...

Hezbollah guerillas should have been targeted with other terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaida and the Taliban, which operate in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Kerry said. However, Bush, has focused military strength on Iraq.

"This is about American security and Bush has failed. He has made it so much worse because of his lack of reality in going into Iraq.…We have to destroy Hezbollah," he said.Link (http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060723/UPDATE/607230360).

So if I understand correctly, if Kerry had been elected, Israel wouldn't be invading Lebanon to destroy Hezbollah right now because we would have already done it instead of invading Iraq.

[shecky]

If Bush hadn't concentrated so much resources on Iraq, I suspect we might have some power to fight some real problems. He makes a good point that's being echoed by growing numbers of conservatives (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/22/eveningnews/main1826838.shtml).

[Upchurch]

No word on how much he'd had to drink.
Link (http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060723/UPDATE/607230360).

So if I understand correctly, if Kerry had been elected, Israel wouldn't be invading Lebanon to destroy Hezbollah right now because we would have already done it instead of invading Iraq.
My head hurts. I think I'm going to move to Canada.

[Jocko]

If Bush hadn't concentrated so much resources on Iraq, I suspect we might have some power to fight some real problems. He makes a good point that's being echoed by growing numbers of conservatives (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/22/eveningnews/main1826838.shtml).

We've got 100,000 troops in a (semi) friendly nation that borders Syria AND Iran. Looks to me like we're already more than halfway to solving "the real problems."

[headscratcher4]

We've got 100,000 troops in a (semi) friendly nation that borders Syria AND Iran. Looks to me like we're already more than halfway to solving "the real problems."

Because we've done so well "solving" the problems in the country where those troops are located?

Considering how well they managed the invasion of Iraq, calmed it, won the peace, ended the sectarian violence, created a public largely happy and favorable to US influence, a working democracy, a functioning economy, etc. It should be a cake-walk for this Administration.

I can already see the "Mission Accomplished II" press event.....

[Jocko]

Because we've done so well "solving" the problems in the country where those troops are located?

Considering how well they managed the invasion of Iraq, calmed it, won the peace, ended the sectarian violence, created a public largely happy and favorable to US influence, a working democracy, a functioning economy, etc. It should be a cake-walk for this Administration.

I can already see the "Mission Accomplished II" press event.....

That's because you assume the next expedition will give a rat's @$$ about nation building. It won't.

[BPSCG]

It should be a cake-walk for this Administration.Are you saying it would be for a Kerry administration?

[ImaginalDisc]

Are you saying it would be for a Kerry administration?
At least Kerry would most likely forstall victory parties on the decks of aircraft carriers until after the war is over.

[senorpogo]

Kind of funny

http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2295

In related news, as hostilities along the Lebanon border approached the two-week mark, the crisis was officially added to the list of “bad things that would not have happened during a John Kerry presidency.

[BPSCG]

Kind of funny

http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2295
Gotta love scrappleface.

[headscratcher4]

That's because you assume the next expedition will give a rat's @$$ about nation building. It won't.

Yes, but it will still be the same winners calling the shots. Should give you confidence...I know it does me. Certainly, because they couldn't get one mission right doesn't exclude them from a second, third or even fourth chance...after all, they've got two years left and we've got lots of troops left over....

[Tailgater]

At least Kerry would most likely forstall victory parties on the decks of aircraft carriers until after the war is over.

Are we talking about the same guy that rode in on a swiftboat for a grand entrance?

[headscratcher4]

Are you saying it would be for a Kerry administration?

Well, it is kinda difficult to see how he could have been any worse. Bush has left us with increasingly limited military options and if your only solution is a military one, than you are screwed...especially if you are tied down in other places...but, I forget, the Iraqi army is standing up...any day now, last throes, etc.

[ImaginalDisc]

Are we talking about the same guy that rode in on a swiftboat for a grand entrance?
Are you being figurative, or literal? I don't recall him actually doing that.

[BPSCG]

Well, it is kinda difficult to see how he could have been any worse. Never mind that. How would he have done it better? Keeping in mind Kerry said, "We have to destroy Hezbollah." How would he have accomplished this feat? Who does he mean when he says "we"? U.S. troops? Since the Israelis are doing the job by themselves right now, how would he have done it with less loss of U.S. lives?

[BPSCG]

Are we talking about the same guy that rode in on a swiftboat for a grand entrance?

Are you being figurative, or literal? I don't recall him actually doing that.Careful, Tailgater - ID is notoriously literal-minded.

[ImaginalDisc]

Never mind that. How would he have done it better? Keeping in mind Kerry said, "We have to destroy Hezbollah." How would he have accomplished this feat? Who does he mean when he says "we"? U.S. troops? Since the Israelis are doing the job by themselves right now, how would he have done it with less loss of U.S. lives?
Gee, Israel's been pretty good at surgical strikes by highly trained and dedicated professionals in the past. See: Entebbe. Working with the Lebbanese goverment to swoop in and capture the Hezbullah senior staff a la Columbia might have been an option Kerry considered rather than letting Israel burn a field to kill a snake.

[Jocko]

At least Kerry would most likely forstall victory parties on the decks of aircraft carriers until after the war is over.

Yes, because everyone knows that scene was responsible for every foreign policy problem and not simply a reflexive talking point for rabid Bush haters who prefer emphaisizing a metaphor over dealing with messier realities.

[Tailgater]

Are you being figurative, or literal? I don't recall him actually doing that.

I'm trying to find the link in the sea of swiftboat junk. Yes, during the '04 election he rode in with some of his vet buddies down a river (Boston maybe) to a rally to re-enact his missions in VN. It was hilarious. Tryin to find video or pic of it.

[ImaginalDisc]

Yes, because everyone knows that scene was responsible for every foreign policy problem and not simply a reflexive talking point for rabid Bush haters who prefer emphaisizing a metaphor over dealing with messier realities.
Interesting. I thought that officially declaring a war to be over and throwing a victory party to close it might actually reflect some aspect of the direction he wished to take his foreign policy in.

Edit: Tailgater, please do find it. I'm having trouble, but there's no shortage of blogs and drivel on the subject of his military record from all sides of the political continuum.

[headscratcher4]

Never mind that. How would he have done it better? Keeping in mind Kerry said, "We have to destroy Hezbollah." How would he have accomplished this feat? Who does he mean when he says "we"? U.S. troops? Since the Israelis are doing the job by themselves right now, how would he have done it with less loss of U.S. lives?

I concede to your fair points...

[Jocko]

Interesting. I thought that officially declaring a war to be over and throwing a victory party to close it might actually reflect some aspect of the direction he wished to take his foreign policy in.

A victory party? Last I remember, it was a banner behind an address. No streamers. No hats. No girls popping out of cakes. Are you sure about "victory party"?

Or are you holding Bush responsible for your own misinterpretation of a simple TV image?

[senorpogo]

Gee, Israel's been pretty good at surgical strikes by highly trained and dedicated professionals in the past. See: Entebbe. Working with the Lebbanese goverment to swoop in and capture the Hezbullah senior staff a la Columbia might have been an option Kerry considered rather than letting Israel burn a field to kill a snake.

So he'd work with the Lebanese government? The same Lebanese government that's headed by Prime Minister Fouad Siniora (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/23/le.01.html)?

The guy who said - "Lebanon will not sign any peace agreement with Israel even after the liberation of the Shebaa Farms from Israeli occupation and the release of our prisoners in Israel."

The guy who considers Hezballoh "effective in empowering Lebanon to get rid of the Israeli occupation."

Kerry would have convinced this guy to let Israel and the US come into Lebanon and capture the leaders of Hezballoh?

[ImaginalDisc]

A victory party? Last I remember, it was a banner behind an address. No streamers. No hats. No girls popping out of cakes. Are you sure about "victory party"?

Or are you holding Bush responsible for your own misinterpretation of a simple TV image?
Excuse me, presidents (with the possible exception of Kennedey) seldom throw parties with streamers and nubile women bursting out of cakes regardless of the occasion at which they deliver speeches regarding the course of a war. Your riposte hits a strawman. It's as much of a victory party as you could expect from a president.

[headscratcher4]

It seems to me that the whole discussion is a diversion...the argument seems to be...thank god we dodged the Kerry bullet even as we're being run-over by the Bush train.

In the end, its Bush's watch -- even if he can't or won't do much. The prospect of Bush and Co., however, coming up with any clever ideas seems a tad far fetched given their history.

[JPK]

Good afternoon.
I'm sure I missed it, but I do not recall Hezballoh being one of the issues that Mr. Kerry talked about durring his previous election run. Can anyone provide a link to a quote from Mr. Kerry durring a debate or even a speech?
JPK

[DaChew]

A victory party? Last I remember, it was a banner behind an address. No streamers. No hats. No girls popping out of cakes. Are you sure about "victory party"?

Or are you holding Bush responsible for your own misinterpretation of a simple TV image?


I was under the impression that the Mission Accomplished banner was strung across the USS Abraham Lincoln which was returning to its based and had, in fact, accomplished its mission.

In rereading Bush's speech it appears that he was most prophetic and not in any way under the delusion that the entire war had been won. "In his speech to the troops Thursday night Bush will thank the U.S. military for their efforts in Iraq. "Your courage -- your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other -- made this day possible," according to excerpts of the Bush speech released in advance. "The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done."

[Jocko]

Excuse me, presidents (with the possible exception of Kennedey) seldom throw parties with streamers and nubile women bursting out of cakes regardless of the occasion at which they deliver speeches regarding the course of a war. Your riposte hits a strawman. It's as much of a victory party as you could expect from a president.

Strawman? Repeating your assessment of that hackneyed meme as a "victory party" is a STRAWMAN? Wrong.

If I had disputed that it was a Bar Mitzvah, THAT would be a strawman. Trapping you in your own words is not a strawman.

It's a victory party.

[Jocko]

I was under the impression that the Mission Accomplished banner was strung across the USS Abraham Lincoln which was returning to its based and had, in fact, accomplished its mission.

In rereading Bush's speech it appears that he was most prophetic and not in any way under the delusion that the entire war had been won. "In his speech to the troops Thursday night Bush will thank the U.S. military for their efforts in Iraq. "Your courage -- your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other -- made this day possible," according to excerpts of the Bush speech released in advance. "The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done."

Don't confuse them with facts, context and texture. You'll just make them angrier. They'd rather live by the rule that a picture is worth two words.

[Tailgater]

Kerry made a splashy entrance to the convention city aboard a white ferry decorated with red, white and blue bunting that lumbered across Boston's inner harbor, flanked by Coast Guard speed boats mounted with machine guns. In 1773, American colonists dumped tea into the harbor to protest a British tax, an incident that led to the outbreak of the American Revolution two years later.

The ferry cruised past the Fleet Center convention site to the Charlestown Navy Yard as Kerry stood shoulder-to-shoulder with a dozen members of the Navy swift boat he commanded in Vietnam, along with Jim Rassmann, a Special Forces soldier whose life Kerry saved. Bruce Springsteen's "No Surrender" blared from speakers as the ferry pulled into the dock.

"Bruce Springsteen has it right. No retreat. No surrender. We are taking this fight to the country, and we are going to win back our democracy and our future," Kerry told the crowd greeting his arrival at the navy yard.

I give up. Any search for boats or election coverage related to kerry is endless. Small mention here in a bigger CBS news article. Can't remember if he was wearing his Nam threads or not. He did something simlar in a refurbed swiftboat that was at smaller event. I think he dropped it due to the heat from the swiftboat vets.

[DaChew]

Anyway, back on topic - the possible 08' Democrat Presidential Candidate's delusions - Using the same logic I claim this:

If I had been the Democrat Presidential candidate in 04', not only would I have won, I would have solved world hunger, I'd be married to Jessicas Alba and Simpson simultaneously and I'd have solved all of our energy problems by inventing a free energy machine (well, free to me. You all would be paying through the nose for it - but slightly less than gasoline to make it worthwhile)




Oh, and I'd have deleted Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Quaida and Ashley Simpson by now as well.

[Apollyon]

Anyway, back on topic - the possible 08' Democrat Presidential Candidate's delusions - Using the same logic I claim this:

If I had been the Democrat Presidential candidate in 04', not only would I have won, I would have solved world hunger, I'd be married to Jessicas Alba and Simpson simultaneously and I'd have solved all of our energy problems by inventing a free energy machine (well, free to me. You all would be paying through the nose for it - but slightly less than gasoline to make it worthwhile)




Oh, and I'd have deleted Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Quaida and Ashley Simpson by now as well.
Paris Hilton would still be a virgin and Kim Jong il would be performing Kabuki 7 nights a week at Tokyo Disney Seas.

[daredelvis]

Don't confuse them with facts, context and texture. You'll just make them angrier. They'd rather live by the rule that a picture is worth two words.
Facts, context and texture is what it was all about. The President landing a plane is about as close to "girls jumping out of a cake" as you will ever get.


Daredelvis
Not to confuse you with facts.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031029-2.html

Q He also said that his advance team hadn't had any part in it. And you're now -- you're now saying that you actually did create the banner.

MR. McCLELLAN: That's not what he said. That is not what he said. Look back at what he said. We said all along, and we said previously that it was the idea -- that the idea of the banner -- for the banner was suggested by those on board on ship. And they asked --

Q So who ordered --

MR. McCLELLAN: And they asked -- they asked if we could help take care of the production of the banner. And we more than happy to do so because this is a very nice way to pay tribute to our sailors and aviators and men and women in the military who are on board that ship for a job well done.

Q Scott, just to follow up , did you not have anything to do, though, with the placement of the banner? I know the White House often makes sure that things are placed right, behind the President so that when it's on the TV --

MR. McCLELLAN: Of course, our advance people work closely with people at event sites when the President is participating in an event. But again, this was an idea that was suggested by those on board the ship.

Q Scott, knowing what we know now, that the Navy, apparently they say that they did request this banner, that what the President said was technically accurate, but would you concede that the gist of what he was saying was misleading because it left the impression for -- that he was saying that the White House didn't have anything to do it. You don't think it was misleading?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's not what he -- no, that's not what he said.

[BPSCG]

I concede to your fair points...Damn it, stop being reasonable.

It seems to me that the whole discussion is a diversion...the argument seems to be...thank god we dodged the Kerry bullet even as we're being run-over by the Bush train.

In the end, its Bush's watch -- even if he can't or won't do much. The prospect of Bush and Co., however, coming up with any clever ideas seems a tad far fetched given their history.That's better.

No, the actual issue here is that we have the guy who lost the '04 election (did you know he served in Viet Nam, BTW?) saying how he would have done a better job destroying Hezbollah than the current administration even though the current administration has done very nicely by letting the Israelis do the dirty work. Now the current administration is coming in after Hezbollah has gotten bloodied and is asking, "Had enough? Then make peace with Israel." Seems pretty diplomatic to me.

I guess what Kerry is saying is that since "we have to destroy Hezbollah," he'd have gone "cowboy" and pitched in to help the Israelis.

Or something.

[marksman]

I guess what Kerry is saying is that since "we have to destroy Hezbollah," he'd have gone "cowboy" and pitched in to help the Israelis.

You know, he still can. IDF might appreciate another grunt volunteer for the front lines.

[geni]

I guess what Kerry is saying is that since "we have to destroy Hezbollah," he'd have gone "cowboy" and pitched in to help the Israelis.


No need. If you are working on a slightly longer timescale than Israel and are not Israel you suppy funding and support to the centeral goverment and the non Hezbollah factions. This reduces the power vaccume and weakens Hezbollah in short order.

[BPSCG]

No need. If you are working on a slightly longer timescale than Israel and are not Israel you suppy funding and support to the centeral goverment and the non Hezbollah factions. This reduces the power vaccume and weakens Hezbollah in short order.Yes, as we all know, Hezbollah has no rich sugar daddies giving them money and arms. That's why they've been collecting Coca Cola bottles and recycling them for spending money.

[Tailgater]

No need. If you are working on a slightly longer timescale than Israel and are not Israel you suppy funding and support to the centeral goverment and the non Hezbollah factions. This reduces the power vaccume and weakens Hezbollah in short order.

Funding for what and support for what?

[geni]

Yes, as we all know, Hezbollah has no rich sugar daddies giving them money and arms. That's why they've been collecting Coca Cola bottles and recycling them for spending money.

Are you seriously suggesting that the US can't outfund Iran and Syria?

[Jocko]

Are you seriously suggesting that the US can't outfund Iran and Syria?

Don't look now, but your goalposts just moved.

[geni]

Funding for what and support for what?

Depends how long term you are thinking. Short term arm whatever is left of the maronite militias and provide them with training. Slightly longer term infrastructure. You get people to turn to the goverment Hezbollah rather than Hezbollah. You get people to think of themselves as lebanese rather than Hezbollah supporters which gives the goverment a stronger grip over the army. either way Hezbollah is weakened.

[geni]

Don't look now, but your goalposts just moved.

Not really. Hezbollah have funding but far from a vast amount. Everyone else has a little aid and some funding from tourists. Who do you think is going to be the most powerful under those conditions?

[Jocko]

Depends how long term you are thinking. Short term arm whatever is left of the maronite militias and provide them with training. Slightly longer term infrastructure. You get people to turn to the goverment Hezbollah rather than Hezbollah. You get people to think of themselves as lebanese rather than Hezbollah supporters which gives the goverment a stronger grip over the army. either way Hezbollah is weakened.

So, we're supposed to forever bribe them into adopting an entirely new cultural ethos. Why didn't your say so? I thought you had something crazy or untenable in mind.

[BPSCG]

Not really. Hezbollah have funding but far from a vast amount. Everyone else has a little aid and some funding from tourists. Who do you think is going to be the most powerful under those conditions?The guy with the most guns, the biggest militia, and the greatest willingness to kill his political opponents.

[Tailgater]

Depends how long term you are thinking. Short term arm whatever is left of the maronite militias and provide them with training. Slightly longer term infrastructure. You get people to turn to the goverment Hezbollah rather than Hezbollah. You get people to think of themselves as lebanese rather than Hezbollah supporters which gives the goverment a stronger grip over the army. either way Hezbollah is weakened.

Wouldn't the lebonese have to ask first? Before other countries start training militia inside the borders? Or are you offering to pay everyone off?

[Tailgater]

You are also assuming that Hezbollah acts only for financial gain.

[geni]

So, we're supposed to forever bribe them into adopting an entirely new cultural ethos.

No. Why would you want to do that? No you just get the non Hezbollah groups into the assendent. They should take care of things from there. The cultural ethos of most of the rest of of lebanon isn't really a problem (well not for anyone the US public cares about anyway).

Your long term aim would probably to reattach southen lebanon to Syria since it is somewhat less complex to hold Syria responcible than Hezbollah.

[Jocko]

No. Why would you want to do that? No you just get the non Hezbollah groups into the assendent. They should take care of things from there. The cultural ethos of most of the rest of of lebanon isn't really a problem (well not for anyone the US public cares about anyway).

Your long term aim would probably to reattach southen lebanon to Syria since it is somewhat less complex to hold Syria responcible than Hezbollah.

Geni, I understood the idea. My sarcasm was directed at the obvious way it would fail instantly. You seem to approach matters of human nature expecting the precise cause and effect relationships of engineering, and it just ain't so.

Numbers don't lie because they see no profit in it.
People do, because they do see profit in it.

[geni]

Wouldn't the lebonese have to ask first? Before other countries start training militia inside the borders? Or are you offering to pay everyone off?

Lebonese? There isn't really any such thing at least no in terms of the current Lebanon.. In the short term no one could stop you funding the Marronites. If you take the longer term option what goverment is going to say no to aid?

[geni]

Numbers don't lie because they see no profit in it.
People do, because they do see profit in it.

Sure people lie. What of it? In more conventional militry terms you are playing devide and control.

[geni]

The guy with the most guns, the biggest militia, and the greatest willingness to kill his political opponents.

And we get to chose the guy with the most guns and the biggest militias. That is how you stop Hezbollah. If you want democracy and freedom you are always going to have problems because you are trying to stick together a country that should not really exist in it's current form.

[BPSCG]

Sure people lie. What of it? In more conventional militry terms you are playing devide and control.So you're saying the solution is to give the anti-Hezbollah factions enough money to buy all the weapons they need to beat Hezbollah.

Now keep in mind two things:

Hezbollah has lots of weaponry; they're doing a respectable job against Israel right now, and,
Arming the anti-Hezbollah groups to the teeth like that and telling them to take care of Hezbollah themselves is essentailly saying a civil war is the solution to Lebanon's problems.Is that what you believe?

[geni]

You are also assuming that Hezbollah acts only for financial gain.

No I'm not.

[Jocko]

Lebonese? There isn't really any such thing at least no in terms of the current Lebanon.. In the short term no one could stop you funding the Marronites. If you take the longer term option what goverment is going to say no to aid?

I thought they had a democratically-elected government in place, but then I guess that's what I get for reading the newspapers.

If there IS no government, then what the problem with Israel's attacks? More to the point, who do you make the aid checks out to? Think, Geni, think!

[geni]

So you're saying the solution is to give the anti-Hezbollah factions enough money to buy all the weapons they need to beat Hezbollah.

Now keep in mind two things:

Hezbollah has lots of weaponry; they're doing a respectable job against Israel right now,

Sure Israel are an outside force who due to their western set up has a hard time takeing losses. Haifa is takeing a lot of economic damage right now and that hurts Israel rather a lot. The more sophistacated part of lebanons economy dissapeared a few days ago so there is less left to lose. Rocket attacks on urban centers would be less of a problem.



Arming the anti-Hezbollah groups to the teeth like that and telling them to take care of Hezbollah themselves is essentailly saying a civil war is the solution to Lebanon's problems. Is that what you believe?

I didn't say that. Isaid it was the logical short term solution to Hezbollah. Long term you need to split the place in two.

[Ziggurat]

Are you seriously suggesting that the US can't outfund Iran and Syria?

Actually, we can't, because
1) we have no historic allies in Lebanon whom we can really trust with giving large amounts of money to (isn't the accusation that we supported too many despots one of the main charges against us?)
2) it doesn't matter if we outfund them unless the side we fund is also as willing to use that money to kill as Hezbollah, because without that kind of will, Hezbollah still has the upper hand.

In other words, in order for what you're advocating to actually work, we would basically have to restart the Lebanese civil war with heavy aid to one side, so that Hezbollah gets violently crushed by other Lebanese instead of by Israel. But that is a FAR bloodier prospect than the current conflict. There's a certain indifference to Arabs killing other Arabs from many critics of Israel, so perhaps you would prefer such a scenario. But I wouldn't, most Americans wouldn't, most Lebanese probably wouldn't, and there's no chance we're going to try.

[BPSCG]

I didn't say that. Isaid it was the logical short term solution to Hezbollah. Long term you need to split the place in two.Ah, partition the place. Like they did with the British Palestine Mandate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_mandate) in 1947.

Yes, that worked out very well, indeed.

[geni]

I thought they had a democratically-elected government in place, but then I guess that's what I get for reading the newspapers.

There is (sort of for example regardless of results the Armenian Orthodox group get 5 seats). Just doesn't have much in the way of real power though.


If there IS no government, then what the problem with Israel's attacks?

Hurting non Hezbollah groups combiened with past experence that suggests that it wont work (last time around Israel ended up hireing locals to fight Hezbollah).


More to the point, who do you make the aid checks out to? Think, Geni, think!

Depends which stratergy. Short term whoever is in charge of the christian militias (you could bribe the druze into being on their side if you want). Longer term the mess

[geni]

Ah, partition the place. Like they did with the British Palestine Mandate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_mandate) in 1947.

Yes, that worked out very well, indeed.

Lebanon is an artficial construct from the same erea. The south should be part of syria. If the french hand't seperated it off we would not be faceing the current problem.

[geni]

Actually, we can't, because
1) we have no historic allies in Lebanon whom we can really trust with giving large amounts of money to (isn't the accusation that we supported too many despots one of the main charges against us?)
2) it doesn't matter if we outfund them unless the side we fund is also as willing to use that money to kill as Hezbollah, because without that kind of will, Hezbollah still has the upper hand.

I think it safe to say that the christian militias do not like Hezbollah.


In other words, in order for what you're advocating to actually work, we would basically have to restart the Lebanese civil war with heavy aid to one side, so that Hezbollah gets violently crushed by other Lebanese instead of by Israel. But that is a FAR bloodier prospect than the current conflict. There's a certain indifference to Arabs killing other Arabs from many critics of Israel, so perhaps you would prefer such a scenario. But I wouldn't, most Americans wouldn't, most Lebanese probably wouldn't, and there's no chance we're going to try.

Well you failed empire building 101.

Looks like you are going to have to take the slightly longer term option then.

[WildCat]

I give up. Any search for boats or election coverage related to kerry is endless. Small mention here in a bigger CBS news article. Can't remember if he was wearing his Nam threads or not. He did something simlar in a refurbed swiftboat that was at smaller event. I think he dropped it due to the heat from the swiftboat vets.
I think this is the story (http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040729-123051-7954r.htm) you were referring to. First result that came up for me. :p

[DaChew]

Facts, context and texture is what it was all about. The President landing a plane is about as close to "girls jumping out of a cake" as you will ever get.


Daredelvis
Not to confuse you with facts.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031029-2.html

Q He also said that his advance team hadn't had any part in it. And you're now -- you're now saying that you actually did create the banner.

MR. McCLELLAN: That's not what he said. That is not what he said. Look back at what he said. We said all along, and we said previously that it was the idea -- that the idea of the banner -- for the banner was suggested by those on board on ship. And they asked --

Q So who ordered --

MR. McCLELLAN: And they asked -- they asked if we could help take care of the production of the banner. And we more than happy to do so because this is a very nice way to pay tribute to our sailors and aviators and men and women in the military who are on board that ship for a job well done.

Q Scott, just to follow up , did you not have anything to do, though, with the placement of the banner? I know the White House often makes sure that things are placed right, behind the President so that when it's on the TV --

MR. McCLELLAN: Of course, our advance people work closely with people at event sites when the President is participating in an event. But again, this was an idea that was suggested by those on board the ship.

Q Scott, knowing what we know now, that the Navy, apparently they say that they did request this banner, that what the President said was technically accurate, but would you concede that the gist of what he was saying was misleading because it left the impression for -- that he was saying that the White House didn't have anything to do it. You don't think it was misleading?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's not what he -- no, that's not what he said.

Wow. The press really dug down deep to try to pull that out didn't they?

So it went from "Bush declares victory in Iraq" to "The White House Helped Place a Banner".

[Azure]

What I thought when I first read the title?

Man someone is full of themselves.

[Skeptic]

At least Kerry would most likely forstall victory parties on the decks of aircraft carriers until after the war is over.

Except for the fact that there wasn't a victory party.

The famous "mission accomplished" banner was put on the the deck of the aircrat carrier by its crew to symbolize the fact that its mission--its four-month (I think) tour of duty--was accomplished, which it was. Bush's tumbs-up sign was simply that of a pilot returning from a mission.

When he actually did speak about Iraq at the time, he said the obvious truth: namely, that the conquest of Iraq had ended, but the rebuilding had only begun, and that that is going to be the difficult part. Which, apart from being obviously true, shows a quite different sentiment than the alleged "victory party" that never was.

Most "evil Bush" stories, when investigated, have about as much crediblity as those of the lives of the saints, and believed with the same fervor by the holders of the that one true faith, "Buck Fush".

In the case of the banner, of course, there was a triple deception, but... by the press. FIRST they put up the photos to make the impression that Bush claimed that it was "mission accomplished" in Iraq, instead of the crew putting a "mission accomplished" sign about their own tour of duty. THEN, they tried to find some connection--ANY connection--between the people who put up the banner and the white house, to try and make it look as if it was done on "Bush's orders". FINALLY, they blamed Bush for "misleading" the public, due to the "misleading" banner that, if it were misleading at all, was only so because of the press's deliberate deliberate and cynical "misunderstanding" of what it meant.

[steverino]

The "Mission Accomplished" banner celebrated the USS Abraham Lincoln's track record of deployments. The New York Times and others exploited this because of sour grapes. Now then, had Kerry been president, there would be no mission to accomplish in the first place. He would be Kim Jung Il's butt-boy in North Korea, and he'd be sending Jimmy Carter to Southern Lebanon to brown-nose those terrorists, and nothing would be accomplished. Perhaps France and Cofee Annon would be our friends, but still, America and Israel would not be any safer from terror.

[joobie]

kerry is about as relevant as my next door neighbor.

[joobie]

Facts, context and texture is what it was all about. The President landing a plane is about as close to "girls jumping out of a cake" as you will ever get.

no no, the president of the USA does that every time a ship completes whatever it's mission is. despite the fact that never gets mentioned until later. really! uh-huh. the worst part is that people have chosen to believe it.

i'd like to see one other example of that happening. ever. by the way, please explain it's symbolic significance. remember to include the fact that bush's speech talked about the end of major combat. i guess that happens all the time too.

[gumboot]

Ah, partition the place. Like they did with the British Palestine Mandate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_mandate) in 1947.


Don't forget Korea.

Oh, and Vietnam.

Oh yeah, and of course Bosnia.

Then there's Timor...

:rolleyes:

One might argue the diplomats are repeating the same tactic over and over despite continual failures. But of course that can't be right, because we know that's what Israel is doing...

-Andrew

[Ziggurat]

I think it safe to say that the christian militias do not like Hezbollah.

That wasn't my point. Sure, they don't like Hezbollah. But who, among the christian militias, can we trust with all this money to not only beat up on Hezbollah, but not also become a tyrant? Trust goes beyond knowing who their enemy is.

Well you failed empire building 101.

This may be hard for you to understand, but America isn't in the empire-building game. I'm always amazed at how the past sins of Europe are projected onto America today.

[Jocko]

What I thought when I first read the title?

Man someone is full of themselves.

My first thought was to reflect on how easy it is to call the plays from the stands, like all the other loud-mouthed bozos who haven't a clue what's going on down on the field.

[Ziggurat]

kerry is about as relevant as my next door neighbor.
Knock, Knock.
- Who's there?
John Kerry.
- Never heard of him.

[Azure]

My first thought was to reflect on how easy it is to call the plays from the stands, like all the other loud-mouthed bozos who haven't a clue what's going on down on the field.

Sooooo, what exactly are you suggesting. Its one thing to suggest a solution, or even suggest a different course of action, its a completely different matter to say, "If I was President, all the problems in the world would be solved" as if saying that just by having Kerry in the WhiteHouse, the terrorists would suddenly quit their mindless warefare in fear of Kerry's 4 purple hearts.

:cool:

[Jocko]

Sooooo, what exactly are you suggesting. Its one thing to suggest a solution, or even suggest a different course of action, its a completely different matter to say, "If I was President, all the problems in the world would be solved" as if saying that just by having Kerry in the WhiteHouse, the terrorists would suddenly quit their mindless warefare in fear of Kerry's 4 purple hearts.

:cool:

Actually, now that you mention it, "calling the plays" really is giving that slack-jawed snob too much credit. It's more like making rude noises from the stands - certainly nothing as coherent or convincing as actually calling a play. ;)

[BPSCG]

My first thought was to reflect on how easy it is to call the plays from the stands, like all the other loud-mouthed bozos who haven't a clue what's going on down on the field.And who can forget this prize-winner from Kerry's running-mate?If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is President, people like Christopher Reeve will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again. Man, I shoulda voted for these guys. They're good!

It's true! :)

[NoZed Avenger]

Yes, but it will still be the same winners calling the shots. Should give you confidence...I know it does me. Certainly, because they couldn't get one mission right doesn't exclude them from a second, third or even fourth chance...after all, they've got two years left and we've got lots of troops left over....

Does the same reasoning apply equally to UN misisons, such as Kosovo (7 years and a wildly successful new government with the complete end of all sectarian violence. . . . whoops, my mistake; they have not even begun setting up a government); the Congo; Rwanda; Mosambique; Chad; Somalia; Sierra Leone; Cambodia; East Timor?

I'd just like to make sure we're all using the same yardstick. Does the UN get a twentieth chance?

[Azure]

Actually, now that you mention it, "calling the plays" really is giving that slack-jawed snob too much credit. It's more like making rude noises from the stands - certainly nothing as coherent or convincing as actually calling a play. ;)

LOL.

We're all still armchair generals in one way or another.

[Jocko]

LOL.

We're all still armchair generals in one way or another.

True, but at least I never shot myself and demanded a medal for it. Allegedly. ;)

[corplinx]

Anyone slightly familiar with the history of Lebanon is probably holding their head like they have a migraine.

[DaChew]

And who can forget this prize-winner from Kerry's running-mate?

If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is President, people like Christopher Reeve will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.

Man, I shoulda voted for these guys. They're good!

It's true! :)

George Bush killed Christopher Reeve? I didn't know that.

[BPSCG]

George Bush killed Christopher Reeve? I didn't know that.Stick around; you'll learn all kinds of true stuff here.

[geni]

Anyone slightly familiar with the history of Lebanon is probably holding their head like they have a migraine.

Not really. By historic standards things are pretty peacful there at the moment.

[geni]

That wasn't my point. Sure, they don't like Hezbollah. But who, among the christian militias, can we trust with all this money to not only beat up on Hezbollah, but not also become a tyrant? Trust goes beyond knowing who their enemy is.

Ok so you have a problem with tyrants. Definetly going to have to take the longer term options.



This may be hard for you to understand, but America isn't in the empire-building game. I'm always amazed at how the past sins of Europe are projected onto America today.

The US wants large numbers of countires the act in a certain way. The most effective way of doing this appears to be empire building.

[Ziggurat]

The US wants large numbers of countires the act in a certain way. The most effective way of doing this appears to be empire building.

No, actually, it isn't. The most effective way is to establish hegemony, and hegemony is very different from empire. Europe is stuck on thoughts of empire because that's the only way European countries ever attained leadership in the world. Hence the endless prattling about imperialism: they can't imagine that we would want something else, but we do.

[steverino]

OK. So Kerry is as relevant as that one member's neighbor. Any experts out there willing to speculate on how President Hillary and First-Man Bill will handle Islamo-terrorism? I would say, for better or worse, she is going to be very relevant very soon.

[gumboot]

The most effective way is to establish hegemony, and hegemony is very different from empire.


I have always found it so strange how the word "hegemony" has come to mean something so completely different from its original usage. *Shrugs* That's the english language for you.

-Andrew

[Jocko]

OK. So Kerry is as relevant as that one member's neighbor. Any experts out there willing to speculate on how President Hillary and First-Man Bill will handle Islamo-terrorism? I would say, for better or worse, she is going to be very relevant very soon.

I'll take that bet. She won't even win the nomination. ;)

[geni]

No, actually, it isn't. The most effective way is to establish hegemony, and hegemony is very different from empire.

Interesting claim. History doesn't support it.

[Jocko]

Interesting claim. History doesn't support it.

History is not over.

[Azure]

True, but at least I never shot myself and demanded a medal for it. Allegedly. ;)

LMAO. :D

[Ziggurat]

Interesting claim. History doesn't support it.

Yeah, well, we've never had a truly global economy before either, so big surprise you can't really find a precedent other than the US. But seeing as how we DID become the dominant world power, both politically and economically, without becoming an empire, it's a pretty hard case to argue that history contradicts it either.

[Giz]

Yeah, well, we've never had a truly global economy before either, so big surprise you can't really find a precedent other than the US. But seeing as how we DID become the dominant world power, both politically and economically, without becoming an empire, it's a pretty hard case to argue that history contradicts it either.

Hmmm, I think that studies have shown that the world economy was in many ways more linked in the years before 1914...