Okay.
Whatever. I am clarifying that corruption grossly inflated the cost of these projects. They were awash with cash. So don’t get so huffy about this. Believe me, I would not dream of speaking for you.
Point noted. I misphrased this. You are correct. But I would say that even in the event of a cateogry 3 that this flooding would still have occurred because the structures were not even up to category 3 because of corruption.
Mapo:
The fact that the Washington Post is even printing this gives me cause for hope that this matter will continue to be investigated completely. Forget about Valerie Plame and her scarf and sunglasses glamor wanna be prancing. The real story is why this all happened in New Orleans and what can be done to prevent it from happening again. That will require that the media focus the spotlight on corrupt New Orleans and the Lousiana state government and keep it there with the federal government coming down on them like a ton of bricks every time they make a misstep. Everyone complains that FEMA is taking too long to award money and that makes me laugh. I wouldn’t write a check for a quarter hell even a dime or nickel’s worth of merchandise in New Orleans until I saw it in my hand and then had it double checked for authenticity.
Fred,
You still have one bubble to go - one encouraged by the new tax laws no less - usually economic performance is not directly attribuable to any one administation. I don’t know that the US economy is really that healthly - lot’s of indicators are still pretty mixed. (read the beige book). Long term issues about national savings remain unsolved - despite the hype surrounding the tax cuts. Hurricane’s while they may create short-term disruption, can actual spur investment as capital stock is rebuilt.
Medicaid needs reform more than Social Security. And is privatization really an answer to the issue of Social Security?
The jury is still out on the exact threat that Saddam posed, as unpleasant a tyrant as he is/was. There was also a lot of concern before the war started about the actual exsitence of WMDs, if I recall properly. But leaning on your intell. staff to toe-the-line is a really cheap way of getting “consensus”. But that is the MO of this administration - question during time of “war” (the war started right after 9/11, right?) and you’re unpatriotic or defeatest. You yourself have called or implied that people are these things on Forumosa - and more and more I consider you a mouthpiece for the administration.
You mention that a the Supreme Court as a triumph - but it is actually luck - a death and a retirement just happened to fall under the current administration. Its happened before.
BTW: Who is “WE” that you are representing - the “silent majority”? “Civil” society? Republicans Abroad? or Fred and his cabal?
[quote]Fred,
You still have one bubble to go - one encouraged by the new tax laws no less - usually economic performance is not directly attribuable to any one administation. I don’t know that the US economy is really that healthly - lot’s of indicators are still pretty mixed. (read the beige book). Long term issues about national savings remain unsolved - despite the hype surrounding the tax cuts. Hurricane’s while they may create short-term disruption, can actual spur investment as capital stock is rebuilt. [/quote]
All of these problems have been around for quite some time. Why are they suddenly Bush’s problem?
Yes, but at least Bush offered a proposal. What’s your solution? Do nothing and hope that 1 percent returns cover the growing retiree population?
Actually, if you are speaking about the media yeah you are probably right the debate is still ongoing. If you talk to strategists or defense experts, most seem to view him as an actual threat that required action, but then I am sure that the journalists are probably right. haha
Yes, there was a lot of concern by all intelligence agencies before the war, but where do you get the leaning on the intel staff? Is that from Wilson’s trip? Did you read the FULL report? In it, it stated that contrary to Wilson’s view, a Nigerien official admitted Iraq was trying to set up trade ties with Niger and sent a very important delegation or was trying to but what does Niger export? I will leave that to you to figure out so the Senate report directly contradicted Wilson and then Wilson went public. I don’t know where you work but that was not whistle blowing. That was the equivalent of a direct revolt against official policy that was made after weighing the pros and cons. Wilson disagreed and fair enough but that did not give him the right to go public and doing so HE endangered his wife’s cover because this was bound to come out. Why? Because he claimed untruthfully that Cheney had sent him to Niger. That little lie ensured that Cheney would damned well want to find out who really did. Why is this so difficult to understand?
Whatever. I am a mouthpiece for this administration, one that is able to at least write coherently about why I support the position, surely even my critics would give me that. I just do not believe in all these conspiracy theories and I take great exception to the historical revisionism that suddenly there was “doubt” that Saddam had wmds. None were found but the Duelfer report stated that in its view Saddam had every intention of restarting his programs once sanctions were lifted. Again, it was up to Saddam to prove not for us to prove that he did or did not have wmds. You get that right? He was not compliant. Even the UN agreed to this 17 times so why was the 18th necessary?
True but that court will be around for a long time and I am going to be liking that very much.
Those who agree with me. I am speaking as someone sharing a view that a certain number of others agree with. But do think of it as a cabal. It will help stoke Spook’s paranoia. And that amuses me.
But seriously, think about this. I can and do post a lot of links and information that buttress my views surely you accept that? And while I accept that people could be against the war, they cannot do so by saying that no one thought Saddam was a threat and that the wmd threat was something exaggerated and manipulated by either Bush or Blair. We have so many comments from so many world leaders including Clinton and Kerry stating to the contrary. So, argue against the war. Blame us for getting stuck in a difficult situation without sufficient planning. BUT do not say that Saddam was not a threat and that there was a question about whether he did or did not have wmds. The debate was about acting. I think we were right to do so, but you can disagree. What you cannot do is say that our actions were based on lies or manipulations. See the difference?
No Fred - not all defence experts agree that Saddam was a clear and present danger so to speak. Many see it as a possibly dangerous diversion from the GWOT.
As I said - one bubble is getting worse due to a change in cap. gains tax. But in general - no one administration should take credit or take blame for economic performance - but in this case the low i and low tax made a bad bubble worse. So what next - do we get inflation due to the lose money or are we going to get a contraction as the new Fed. chairman pops the bubble? Try to take the credit, take the blame too…
Social Security is not intended to supply all of your retirement needs, t is a last fall back. In any case, there is no need to fix it in the near or even medium term. So thanks for trying to fix a problem that doesn’t really exists. How about fix the one that really does - how long is Medicaid going to hold out?
I actually wasn’t going to link this to Plame - that is just a non-important and sad side-show that demonstrates the kind of political hardball this administration plays - I was actually thinking more of Tenent (sp?). Of course, we didn’t listen to the weapons inspectors either did we? But I do think that there is agood case for manipulation - look at the much discussed report to the UN. Screwed Colin pretty good - luckily he’s a good soldier and won’t say anything. Also, don’t automatically assume that by saying the current administration got it wrong I’m saying the previous administration got it right.
You claim to write coherently (actually you are one of the few who has the time) and you ask if I can take the fact that you can link things to back up your arguement. The answer is yes to both. Both are admirable. But your linking also shows that you are just as much a slave to the “media” as the “left” you denigrate so loudly. Is it so just 'cause it’s on the web?
Many people do support you - but that just makes your use of “WE” to make Spook “paranoid” that much more of cheap and empty shot.
Instead of Iraq we now have an “Iran” unleashed, which to me is much more dangerouse than Iraq.
Who? Links? Not to journalists but to real defense establishment figures. Also, why would the war on Iraq mean that we could not fight al Qaeda? We seem to be doing just fine in arresting those that try to get out of the mountains, but unless you want us to invade Iran and Pakistan, we have a bit of a problem accessing them ourselves.
The housing bubble is getting worse and that is true so I don’t know. We will have to keep an eye on it, but the economy is not a mess. If you think it is, then whose economy do you think is not?
News to most people since most Americans have no savings and intend to depend fully on Social Security and if not that then some kind of public aid. Medicare and Medicaid are a mess and what do you suggest doing about them?
So Wilson is a concerned citizen who lies about who sent him to Niger and about what he found there. Rebutting his lies and mischaracterizations by stating that you (in the case of Cheney) were not the one that sent him there is wrong because it accidentally gets wife Plame involved?
They did not say that there was nothing there. They just doubted the credibility of specific US claims but even Blix said: Saddam is hiding something. I just don’t know what. Again, it was not up to us to prove anything but for Saddam to comply. Why didn’t he?
If you are talking about the addition of the claim that the British have learned that Saddam is trying to buy yellowcake from Niger? Then you have a problem because the British made that claim and they have stuck to it and Wilson’s own report mentions that this effort was being made.
Nope. I have much more available but no one here is going to take anyone at their word, you know that. What I supply is what is available on the Web. The rest I may know but if I am challenged on it, what can I do but refer them to the original source. This has happened a few times. So this is no being a slave to the media. Also, I do read many newspapers and magazines every day. That does not mean that I fall for the liberal position which is held by 90 percent of journalists. I was taught to read critically and say aha but what about… you get the drill…
Unless of course it were true.
Ah the old fallback position. Tell me, would you or anyone else on the left have supported action against North Korea or Iran and would you do so now today? If so, what would you suggest doing? You only say this because you do not think that we are in a position to do so and for the most part you would be right but it is a “cheap” fig leaf that covers your lack of a real alternative very poorly.
Oh - so you have access to real defence establishment figures? Other than FAS or globalsecurity.org or thier ilk then there is only one place you work. In all you posts, I still have not seen you post any evidence that al Queda was funded or operating our of Iraq. al Qaeda does exist in Iraq, but since it operates as independent cells - well, you do the math…eh?
We’re talking about the US economy…and as it stands now, there are serious fundamental risks - things are not quite as rosy as they seem. Once i rates go up - let’s see how well our credit fueled, re-mortgaged consumers do. Tax breaks may not have caused it - but the cap. gains tax break certainly gave it an incentive in the housing market. Repealing the “death tax” and other items only served as further monetary incentives to push consumption.
Oh - so it’s my problem eh? What, am I the president? Well, better top-up your retirement program and make sure that equities aren’t too large a part. The issue with privatization is that equities will move with the marketwhich is based on sentiment plus fundamentals - so just when you need them to be valuable and liquid - they won’t be. As a country we need to decide what the role of these are to be. In my mind they are a last resort safety net only. In my mind with a shrinking working population, you must boost productivity. In an economy where manufacturing plays an ever smaller role, that means a healthy, well educated population a la Ireland. So you better make a good investment there. In terms of medicare - you’d best fund it and get the medical business in-line with the rest of the world or we’ll continue to subsidize the rest of the world.
Sure - must be purely accidental that hits hit the media. Just make sure you don’t do a Martha Stuart like “Scooter”. No fears - he’ll take one for the “team”.
Not just that - but items like the recycled footage of the flogger…
So, other on this forum can’t read critically…
Is it?
I’m not on the “left” - but the “right” seem very bi-polar about this. You are correct - there is no alternative -certainly not now. This lack of alternative is not my making - I didn’t put us into Iraq and I did not support it - specifically because I do not believe you should use miliary force unless there is a clear and focussed objective appropriate to military means. National building is neither clear, nor focussed, nor suitable for military means. History has also shown that while insurgencies rarely succeed, it is usually the occupying army that disintegrates - all the insurgents have to do is survive in the long run. How many instances are there where they’ve been succcesfully coopted?
Just as I would not support going into Iraq, I would also not support going into NK or Iran. What you are basically saying is that we chose Iraq simply because it was militarily easier to knock over. Too bad it’s not so easy to put humpty back together agian. It is also overly simplistic to lump Iran and NK together - they are two completely different kettle of fish with completely different risks. NK will run out of steam as long as we don’t keep falling for thier bribery - or that we can convince our “friends” the Chinese or our “allies” the S Koreans not to support them. Iran is much tougher - of course now who will support us in the UN if we want to do anything? Looks like the only option left is unilateral military action as Europre is ineffective on its own. So, you’re right - we’ve fucked ourselves out of any options on Iran. The original status quo of pre 9/11 will ultimately untenable is looking quite nicely.
The real issue is thet successfully prosecuting the GWOT is a quiet, low profile event that requires a lot of cooperation from other countries and possibly organizations we’d likely not be seen dealing with. It doesn’t have the “flash” or feeling of “mission acomplished” that Iraq does.
In my mind Iraq is a show of force - “knock down a building and and we’ll knock down your country”. Maybe it is necessary - but I’m not fully convinced.
The rest of what I think the GWOT is doing to us is posted elsewhere.
Elequa:
Sorry you are relatively new to this thread. We have hashed over this already. Do a search. We have all the statement from all the leaders who stated that Saddam was a threat and was developing wmds. If you cannot find it, let me know and I will try to track this down yet once again.
We also linked several sites to show that al Qaeda was active in Iraq. Regardless, Saddam was supporting all kinds of terrorist organizations so I don’t see why we have to split hairs on which and what event was linked to al Qaeda and which and what event was linked to OTHER terrorist groups. What’s the difference?
Yes, we did knock of Iraq because it was possible and we wanted to do so before it became too strong ala North Korea or Iran where we have our hands tied. That is why and this has been talked to death as well Bush said we had to act before the threat became IMMINENT. Honestly, I weep for the future if the level of reading comprehension that seems to be evident on this forum passes for normal.
So we have not been able to put Iraq back together. That was a miscalculation but remember the main thing was to take out Saddam once and for all. The rebuilding and democratization were possible pluses.
Again, I have seen no indication that having our army “bogged down” in Iraq makes us incapable of fighting al Qaeda. In fact if anything we have had neighboring countries cooperating more because of our act of power. Now, if you want to explain to me how we are going to send out troops into northwest Pakistan or how we are going to go into Iran then let me know.
Glad to see that you realize that North Korea and Iran are difficult propositions.
You can disagree with the war in Iraq as I said, but you cannot argue that Saddam was not a threat or that Bush was the only one who believed that he was. You can argue that we were wrong to act but you cannot pretend that we did not have valid reasons. Also, you cannot pretend that the violence and bloodshed in Iraq is something that is a source of criticism because we are not doing the killing AND it was far worse under Saddam. Then the old chestnut about terrorism getting worse. Well, invading Iraq took out and ended Saddam’s support of terrorism and scared Libya, Sudan and Somalia into some vastly improved behavior. It got Syria to cough up Lebanon and cough up a few major figures. So I would say that the results while mixed have been more positive than you are painting them.
Well, I see that you are not offering an opinion on social security or medicaid reform because you are not the president. Okay. It is not your job but what would you like to see him do? What do you think is feasible?
Left? Right? blah blah blah. Bipolar? blah blah blah. I do not really care what you characterize your position as being. I merely assumed that you were on the left because you trot out all the cute little tropisms that are so beloved on the left but which fall apart to the first real line of tough questioning.
Again, agree to disagree if you are against the war, but final point: we had valid reasons and I still think that we were right. I will be back in the Middle East again in a few weeks and I am telling you in 20 years I have never seen the kind of changes that I have seen now and this is for the positive. If the Arabs waste their chance on taking advantage of this new climate, then they can blame only themselves. Look at Lebanon. This is a start and the country is by no means in the free and clear but neither is Ukraine or Georgia. They have been given a chance that is all. Whether they go forward like Eastern Europe or East Asia is up to them. Alternatively, they can end up like Argentina or Venezuela or for that matter France and Germany.
Let me help.
"Senate to probe how case for war was made
"Emboldened by last week’s indictment of former top White House aide I. Lewis Libby, Democrats Tuesday used an obscure parliamentary rule to capture the Senate floor. In doing so, they infuriated Republicans but won a timetable to complete a long-delayed Senate investigation of whether the White House manipulated the intelligence used to justify invading Iraq. . . .
An earlier phase of this probe, completed in July 2004, offered a searing critique of prewar intelligence estimates. Its conclusions were amplified in a report by the 9/11 commission the following month. . . .
But neither review examined whether government officials tendentiously misused intelligence. . . .
Now, so-called Phase 2 would investigate whether public statements, testimony, and reports by US government officials were supported by available intelligence. It would also probe whether a Pentagon policy group under Douglas Feith ginned up the case for war, preempting other intelligence. . . .
Democrats (call) . . . the investigation “moribund” and a whitewash. “Any time the intelligence committee pursued a line of inquiry that brought us close to the role of the White House in all of this … our efforts have been thwarted,” said Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D) of West Virginia, the panel’s vice chairman."
– Christian Science Monitor
[color=blue]Anybody here want to bet whether the Secretary of State at the time, Colin Powell, believes the pivotal speech he gave on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction at the UN in February, 2003 was really justified by the facts at the time?[/color]
A little morning reading
You can read the e-mails here
Some of the comments are interesting to say the least.
We also have the statements of the UN inspectors, CIA, DIA etc. that tell a different story. 
But if you value the statements of other leaders so much than you should not have invaded Iraq, because many of those opposed the invasion / the war.
No they do not Rascal. They tell a story of Saddam being a threat and possibly having wmds. Anyway, it was up to Saddam to comply and EVERYONE agreed that he was not compliant. Find one voice in France, Germany or the UN who said, ah but Saddam is compliant. NOT ONE. Regardless of whether wmds have been found or not, the last report, the Duelfer report stated unequivocally that he had every intention of developing them when sanctions were lifted so that is good enough for me.
The other leaders said they believed that Saddam was a threat and that he was developing wmds. They did not want to act. That was the only difference. Anyway, it is ultimately always American troops that do most of the heavy lifting so what do you care? It has nothing to do with you. Unless of course, you believe that Iraq is an important country in terms of Germany’s political, economic or strategic interests. According to your own foreign ministry, it does not even rank in the top three levels so get a grip for Christ’s sake. It’s like having a major rift in your foreign policy because you oppose French troops being sent to the Cote d’Ivoire (also without UN approval by the way), but here no danger to the international law or the international system as we know it, no dangerous precedents (which were set by the way long before including Kosovo and Bosnia in which both times Germany did not seem to mind acting without UN imprimatur or Kofi Annan for that matter).
Anyway, I imagine that with the election fiasco, you will have to take a bit of time to get your own house in order, eh? haha Give my best to Schroeder and Fischer. I do so miss them.
Admit it. You were led astray by incompetent leaders like Schroeder and Fischer. They played you like a cheap violin, stringing you all along with high-minded talk of international law while stirring up ugly currents of virulent anti-Americanism (the new Jews?) and like past generations of excitable Germans you fell for this.
Now, snap out of it. The US and Germany are made for each other. Their interests align in almost every area from international relations to economics to freedom and democracy to human rights. We are facing the same issues and the same debates so grinding this continuous axe of Bush is a criminal for acting in Iraq ain’t going to get you anywhere. NO ONE has ever said Saddam was not a threat. NO ONE.
AND what would you have us do now? Leave Iraq? Are you denying that at a bare minimum at least 80 percent of the people were and still are very happy to be rid of Saddam? Do you think that we are not trying to promote democracy in Iraq? make it a stable and normal country? Do you oppose our efforts even now? That is where this does not make sense? You can see what we are trying to do there, we are already there, do you oppose what we are attempting to do now? even after the invasion and any disagreement over it is a thing of the past?
Are you aware that a majority of the citizens of the United States now believe the president lied to them in leading the country into war? 
"The war has taken a toll on the administration’s credibility: A clear majority – 55 percent – now says the administration deliberately misled the country in making its case for war with Iraq . . . "
– Washington Post
I wonder if that means a majority of the people of the United States would be happy to see George Bush gone at this point if they had the chance.
"Top FY 2005 DHS Accomplishments: FEMA
* [b]Hurricane Katrina[/b]: The response to Hurricane Katrina was FEMASo strange that the media has been so quiet about the debate going on in the New Orleans elections for mayor, isn’t it? haha Anybody been reading the official www.nola.com Web site? Yeah, FEMA sure is a bad bad organization which is to blame for everyone except those who live in New Orleans. Guess who gets the blame locally? The mayor and governor and there is a lot of discussion going on right now about how and why the levees were so poorly constructed (this ain’t a surprise to anyone living there) and whether the corrupt patronage system is finally going to be dismantled. There is hope, but many are not overly optimistic.
Didn’t they just have a fight w/ Houston over renting apt.'s?
Of course, that is to be expected. Logistically, the number of people they are dealing with is a nightmare but please please please do allow me to enjoy the moment of having everything I predicted and said be backed up by local authorities on the ground. Corruption. Patronage. Local Responsibility. Sing along with me.
Fred
Please remember exactly what I was arguing.
[quote]Politicians here should not undervalue two finite resources: first, the goodwill of Americans and their federal representatives, and second, taxpayer dollars. Maintaining the former boosts the odds of seeing the latter. Thus, Louisiana policymakers must recognize that news of local graft, favoritism, and incompetence will evaporate this city
Things might get interesting again now that the L.A. gov. has released documents. There was an article in the NYT suggesting that FEMA may not have been as responsive as originally supposed.
To be continued…