| single.php (81): | yte::yte_output(objectPost Object
(
[tags:private] => Array
(
[general] => general
[politics] => politics
)
[comments_object:private] => Comments Object
(
[0] => Comment Object
(
[post_object:private] =>
[info:private] => CommentInfo Object
(
[__inforecord_array:protected] => Array
(
)
[_table_name:protected] => commentinfo
[_key_name:protected] => comment_id
[_key_value:protected] => 608
[_loaded:protected] =>
[url_args:protected] =>
)
[fields:protected] => Array
(
[id] => 608
[post_id] => 1919
[name] => Brian
[email] => angel_of_swords@hotmail.com
[url] =>
[ip] => 1146914481
[content] => So, let's see... still no WMDs, though the seed culture facts and the possibility of them being in Syria remain.
Still no domestic terrorist attacks.
Farenheit 9/11 has been just about completely torn apart and reduced to smoldering ash.
Still no Patriot Act violations of civil liberties, according to Amnesty International (unless you count Padilla and Lindh, and I don't.)
Abu Gharib was obnoxious, but frankly fell way short of any classical definition of torture... I mean, we have the other side doing public beheadings fer gosh sakes. It was arguably legal torture, and in no case to be lauded or tollerated.
Sub Note: West Virginians are apparently into freakier sexcapades than I am. this worries me.
What else... hmm.. not John Kerry, it's just not sporting going after such an easy target... how about the Oil for Food scandal, where tens of billions were skimmed into the private pockets of Kofi Annan's kid, Chirac, and others, providing a pretty damning economic incentive for everyone in the international community who said no to the war to have done so?
Plus, of course, we deffered to the "international community" (read: France and the UN on Iran) and look where that is getting us - open defiance, a breaking of the seals, material and personal aid to the Iraqi insurrection...
If Bush wins, Iran goes down within 10 years, garaunteed. Yes, I think this is a good thing. He looses, they have nukes within 10 years, garaunteed. I hope everyone thinks this is a bad thing.
Sum Up: Still voting for Bush, more confidant than before of the rightness of the whole thing (Transition to power on time, Najaf is about ironed out) and happy to discuss these issues with anyone who cares to come along.
[status] => 0
[date] => HabariDateTime Object
(
)
[type] => 0
)
[newfields:protected] => Array
(
[status] => 1
)
[unsetfields:protected] => Array
(
[id] => id
)
[loaded:private] => 1
)
)
[author_object:private] => User Object
(
[info:private] => UserInfo Object
(
[__inforecord_array:protected] => Array
(
[authenticate_time] => Array
(
[value] => 2009-01-06 00:04:22
)
[convenience] => Array
(
[value] => 1
)
[dash_modules] => Array
(
[value] => Array
(
[1] => Latest Entries
[2] => Latest Comments
[3] => Latest Log Activity
[4] => Incoming Links
[5] => GetClicky
)
)
[experience_level] => Array
(
[value] => user
)
[viddler__password] => Array
(
[value] => ranavidd
)
[viddler__token] => Array
(
[value] => f4323211a88a7381652494e474d415354455236b
)
[viddler__username] => Array
(
[value] => ringmaster
)
)
[_table_name:protected] => userinfo
[_key_name:protected] => user_id
[_key_value:protected] => 1
[_loaded:protected] => 1
[url_args:protected] => Array
(
[authenticate_time] => 2009-01-06 00:04:22
[convenience] => 1
[dash_modules] => Array
(
[1] => Latest Entries
[2] => Latest Comments
[3] => Latest Log Activity
[4] => Incoming Links
[5] => GetClicky
)
[experience_level] => user
[viddler__password] => ranavidd
[viddler__token] => f4323211a88a7381652494e474d415354455236b
[viddler__username] => ringmaster
)
)
[group_list:private] =>
[url_args:protected] => Array
(
[info_authenticate_time] => 2009-01-06 00:04:22
[info_convenience] => 1
[info_dash_modules] => Array
(
[1] => Latest Entries
[2] => Latest Comments
[3] => Latest Log Activity
[4] => Incoming Links
[5] => GetClicky
)
[info_experience_level] => user
[info_viddler__password] => ranavidd
[info_viddler__token] => f4323211a88a7381652494e474d415354455236b
[info_viddler__username] => ringmaster
[id] => 1
[username] => owen
[email] => ringmaster@midnightcircus.com
[password] => {SSHA}RGB4MCxXRpDzHkoWIUbV+JC9XXSVB/MW
)
[fields:protected] => Array
(
[id] => 1
[username] => owen
[email] => ringmaster@midnightcircus.com
[password] => {SSHA}RGB4MCxXRpDzHkoWIUbV+JC9XXSVB/MW
)
[newfields:protected] => Array
(
)
[unsetfields:protected] => Array
(
[id] => id
)
[loaded:private] => 1
)
[info:private] => PostInfo Object
(
[__inforecord_array:protected] => Array
(
[wp_id] => Array
(
[value] => 691
)
[yte] => Array
(
[value] =>
)
)
[_table_name:protected] => postinfo
[_key_name:protected] => post_id
[_key_value:protected] => 1919
[_loaded:protected] => 1
[url_args:protected] => Array
(
[wp_id] => 691
[yte] =>
)
)
[url_args:protected] => Array
(
[author_info_authenticate_time] => 2009-01-06 00:04:22
[author_info_convenience] => 1
[author_info_dash_modules] => Array
(
[1] => Latest Entries
[2] => Latest Comments
[3] => Latest Log Activity
[4] => Incoming Links
[5] => GetClicky
)
[author_info_experience_level] => user
[author_info_viddler__password] => ranavidd
[author_info_viddler__token] => f4323211a88a7381652494e474d415354455236b
[author_info_viddler__username] => ringmaster
[author_id] => 1
[author_username] => owen
[author_email] => ringmaster@midnightcircus.com
[author_password] => {SSHA}RGB4MCxXRpDzHkoWIUbV+JC9XXSVB/MW
[info_wp_id] => 691
[info_yte] =>
[content_type_name] => entry
[id] => 1919
[slug] => bush-discussion
[title] => Bush Discussion
[guid] => tag:asymptomatic.net,2007:bush-discussion/1174911596
[content] => I had this political discussion with Brian via IM last October. I wonder how much (if at all) his position has changed. I thought it was interesting and thought-provoking enough to repost here, and I suspect that some readers might have reasonable comments.
<hr />
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 1) what was the buffy website addy and 2) we really need to debate us some politics.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Huh?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian (quoting my site):</span> This really isn't new, most people who read this site probably know this. But the new news is that experts on the intelligence gathered in Iraq have now said that while they watched Powell give his case for war to the UN, he must have knowingly liedr [<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/60II/main577975.shtml">Link</a>].
I don't really find this stuff shocking any more. I'm just anxious to get Bush out of the White House. Put in a Democrat for all I care, just get the faith-based senile war-mongering out of my government, and give me back my $87 billion.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Oh, I thought that was in relation to the buffy stuff.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> nah.. two different topics.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> What did you want to say in regard to the Bush garbage I posted this morning?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> That I'm ready and willing to go to bat for him, for his administration, for the case for the war, etc, systematically disprove idiots like the former aid to Powell who spouted that crap, and demonstrate the validity of the case.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Ugh.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> indeed.
<!--more-->
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I can't even start... What... How... Why? Just make a point or something.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Okay.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> September 12th, 2001.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> What happened on that day?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Day after September 11, 2001.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yeah, continue...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> If I asked you on that day if you thought we would make it to October 16, 2003, with no attacks on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, what do you think you would have said?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Well, I know that I wouldn't have said, "Let's beat up on Iraq to make sure that doesn't happen."
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Okay, acknowledged. But do you think you would have said we would make it this long without being attacked?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I would have said, "I really don't know. I wasn't expecting what happened yesterday, either."
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Fair enough. Most people said, that day, that they did expect another major attack in the next two years.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> If he was doing his job to begin with, there probably shouldn't have been the original attack, nes pas?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> But assuming that he is responsible for keeping the country terrorist-event-free, what exactly has he done that has caused this to happen?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, my 1 point is that by taking the battle to somone who was absolutely known to fund and support terrorists (even if you deny the proven al-Queda links, he publicly supported Hammes et. al. in fighting Isreal) and who is guilty of the most *heinous* human rights abuses, we have liberated a large chunk of humanity, and taken the war away from our nation.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Our job as Americans is now to beat up on religious fanatics half way across the world? Please, no.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, no.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The President's job is to remove likely threats to the security of the nation from abroad.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'd say he succeeded admirably.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yes, blowing everyone else up, regardless of their hostile intent or capability, will succfully eliminate external threats.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Yes. And if we blow up the individuals with explicitly stated and demonstrated hostile intent,t hen we're doing one better.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> When was the last time the US made a preemptive attack?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> On a country that could not directly harm us?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Preemptive? What was preemptive about it?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> And I don't mean 9/11
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> If we know so much about the funding that Iraq had done, why didn't we target the terrorists rather than the lame government that funded them?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I mean the last gulf war.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There are no ties between 9/11 and Iraq. None.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Because many of the places that funnel terroristic funding to the US do so under the cover of civil rights organizations.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, yes, there was.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> But, as I said, I didn't mean 9/11 regarding the preemption.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I mean the temporary cease fire in 1991.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> On the provision that they disarm.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> They didn't.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> We finished the job.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Disarm what?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> What did we finish?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There were no weapons found.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> the 1991 war to shut down and aggressive, totalitarian dictator in response for his demonstrated plans of conquest.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Incorrect.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Those that were found were non-functional and forgotten by their government.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> To this point, no large stashes produced bio toxins or nuclear weapons have been found.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Incorrect.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Prove it.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The Kay report lists dozens of material breaches.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> okay!
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10199">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Ok, their first point... only 10 of 130 depots were searched by them. What of the UN inspectors that had searched and found nothing?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, there are no conservatives in Austin. I am armed to the death with triple redundant research from a dozen disparate sources to back this shit up.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Shall I pull up the interviews with Iraqis detailing how the UN was systematicly lied to?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> You can't in one breath say they are the enemy and the next say that they're the ones providing the evidence.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Or how about the latest independent (Zogby and Gallup) polls indicating that despite massive anti-american propaganda, 73% of Iraqi citizens are glad we're there, and want us to stay?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The Iraqi citizenry was never the enemy.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Only the regime.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Polls done by an agency in a country that has what kind of infrastructure? These people hardly have TV, and what they do have is spotty and propagandized. Of COURSE people who are able to talk to Americans will like americans.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> HAve you seen any of the recent blogs from Iraqi citizens?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> They have tv, over a dozen free newspapers, radio, power, cars...
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Of COURSE Iraqis with computers are going to be progressive...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Dude, downtown Baghdad is in better shape than most of Jersey.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (granted, that's not saying much)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Do some polling in the rural areas... Where it's not possible for gallop to get to.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Do you think that the people with guns fighting our soldiers are hanging out near phones waiting to be called by US papers for interviews?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> No... because they're from Syria.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Or Lebanon.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Or Palestine.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And... to back up a second...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yes?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (p.s. those polls were door to door, by hand... not phone)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> You're just illustrating my point that I would rather have my share of the $87b spent to rejuvinate Jersey than buy overpriced bids on Iraqi oil refinery construction.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> And I would counter that, long term, the rebuilding of Germany and Japan generated vastly more revenue than it cost, over the long run.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> That by investing in the generation of a first world country from a third world country, we can get those oil contracts, and hire lots and lots of Americans to work with Iraqis.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Germany and Japan were efficient producers of goods we consumed before that war. Iraq has nothing but oil to benefit us, and it's already been said by our administration that that money will be used by Iraq to rebuild.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Not Japan. Japan made nothing before WW2
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Japan is also not a dustbowl.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The cost of rebuilding is less than the oil revenue.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> neither is Iraq.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> check out some geomaps, especially of the north.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Besides.... it doens't need to produce anything but oil to get wealthy.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> CIA factbook: "Mostly desert...mostly broad plains"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Two words: Tigris and Euphrates.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> More than enough fresh water to support one of the first and largest cities in the world (pre modern era)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Contingent on agreements with Turkey regarding its development.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Technically, California is mostly desert.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> California also seems mostly unrecoverable...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Heh.. I'll agree with you on that one... though hopefully Arnold will stick to his 100 day plan and pull them out of nose dive.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> <shrug>
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Bottom line, dude: Iraq is being rebuilt, the economy is unquestionably back on an upswing, and no terrorist attacks on US soil.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Bush is doing a good job.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (and I can defend the Patriot act too)
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (since I, y'know, read it.)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Only at the cost of the largest deficit ever (if you don't take into account inflation), and the potential loss of a large number of our civil liberties.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 1) Deficit spending helps the economy (c.f. Reagan) and 2) Name one civil liberty lost by the Patriot Act.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Any one.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'll wait.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Did I say Patriot Act?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> TIA.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah.. that.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, okay, that is a morally questionable thing.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It's also dead.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yeah, ok. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Besides, it's only a violation of civil liberties if the Constitution defined a "right to Privacy"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It doesn't.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It was invented by the Supreme Court to satisfy Row v. Wade.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Er... the possibility of being carted away and imprisoned indefinately for maybe being fingered by a pissed off neightbor as a terrorist seems to infringe on my rights somehow.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> damn.. that would be scary.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Of course, it has no basis in reality.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Here we go, from the top:
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 1) the Patriot act only applies to non citizens and "enemy combatants"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 2) a citizen can only become and "enemy combatant" if declared as such by John Ashcroft.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> One man, known, recognized, acountable.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 3) the declaration of "enemy combatant" must be upheld by judicial review
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (Well, not necessarily Ashcroft... just whoever happens to be Attorney General)
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 4) Creeping abuse of the PA is rendered highly unlikely, because it has a sunset clause... it autmatically ceases to exist unless explicitly voted to continue to exist by Congress.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Who are known and accountable.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Since I'm of the opinon that somone whom can be proven to have real intent and the capacity to blow up buildings ought to be able to be arrested and interrogated, I believe there ought to be a way to do so, and that way ought to have checks and balances.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Like as outlined by the Patriot Act.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There were ways to do this before the Patriot Act, though, weren't there?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> There were. And that's the whole point. The Patriot act did less to expand the powers as to codify the techniques already being used and methods of inter agency cooperation.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The only real expansion of powers was in regards to non citizens.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The effect, though, has exceeded what you define as the intent, true or not.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Now with all that being said: no bill is perfect, and there are places where tyranical, evil, or stupid men could abuse it. All legislation has that inherrant. Regarding that... see the sunset clause.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Provided it is not amplified with a revival of Patriot 2...
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Why did we wait 10 years to enforce the ceasefire? I assume Clinton was just being lazy and having his cigar toked.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The most damning thing to give incentive for the war was to specify that there were WMDs in Iraq. If we were so sure that they existed, shouldn't we know at least where first to look for them?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Aren't we still in danger until they are found?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> one sec
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> patriot 2, in the form last leaked to the public, was also only applicable to enemy combatants and non citizens
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> we waited because the UN kept saying "you have one more chance" every two years"
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Where exactly is this specified in the original, because I can't find it.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> So why did we suddenly flip and say "We're doing this now"?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> it isn't explicitly stated anywhere, because the whole thing is just a series of deltas to existing laws.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Because it became necessary
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> So to what law does it apply that I can reference that says this magic only works on non-citizens and combatants?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The reason to go into Iraq right now (last year) was becasue we knew he was pursuing and suspected he had illegal weapons.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> We've confirmed acquisition programs and discovered seed programs.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Are we still in danger? yes, albeit much less.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And we've found the evidence of those weapons?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The ones for which we suddenly went to war?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yes: refer to the link I sent you.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Illegal weapons? I don't recall your link referring to weapons that break any UN agreement. I'll reread it.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> there is also this: <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10111">Link</a> but that's speculation, not proof.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (albeit fairly believable speculation with evidence to lend it credence)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> After re-read, there is no mention that the found ordinance was not in compliance with UN restrictions.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10288">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Legal ordinance under UN restrictions even included, IIRC, scub missles with limited range.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> half way down
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> though the whole article is quite telling.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Neat. Let's not give in to the "Leftist Lie Factory". This is obviously unbiased reporting. Cite another source.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> How can I take seriously a publication that has "New leftist cheers on baby-killer" on it's home page. HA!
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <sigh>
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Do you know who David Horowitz is?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He didn't write that article.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> in no particular order: ignoring the obvious counter bias in the article I sent you, what are the facts (as oppsed to opinions) that it outlines?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 2) regarding the David Horowitz headline, the one about the baby killer... do you know who he is?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He's a rights activist.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/02/kay.report/">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> That's what I've been looking for...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Yes. He is one of the most irrefutable commentators on the right, because he used to be the most erudite commentator on the left.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Since I do not know this man, I can only say that I don't value the summaries as written by his cohorts as much as I would this CNN article with Kay's own words.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> "We have not yet found stocks of weapons, but we are not yet at the point where we can say definitively either that such weapon stocks do not exist or that they existed before the war and our only task is to find where they have gone. "
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Understood... though, point of clarification: he doesn't run the site, he's simply the local star commentator. the authors of the articles, compiled from many publications, write the blurbs.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> that comment has to do with stocks of undeclared bio weapons.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It doesn't cover declared and found bioweapons or the resources, materials, and fascilities to generate bioweapons.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He's the editor of the site, actually.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Yes.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'm not sure if he personally picks the articles that go up
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I give up. You win. I pledge my allegiance to our president. I'll vote for him next year. I don't want to think about this any more. I have enough problems without trying to figure out when Iraqi planes are going to fall from the sky with water balloons filled with anthrax.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> heh heh heh.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> How about an acknowledgment that it's not as simply as "Bush is evil" and "Invading Iraq was just a ploy for him and his friends to get rich", and we'll let it lie there. (for now)
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Besides, I'm only making these comments because you made public comments on your site, hmm?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> That's not even what I'm saying. That's not even what upsets me.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And it wasn't even... I was just summing up the article that I read in a snarky way...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Well, your calling him a warmonger, and the "anybody but Bush" feel is what set me off.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yes, I do feel that way, but the results are not those you point to.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The results
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (see what snarkyness gets you?)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> to get him and his friends rich.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah... the whole "faith" thing?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I think that regardless of whether the war was warranted, we had a lot of internal problems that he could have addressed while still managing the terror issue (in a way better than I perceive it to have been handled, however correct/incorrect).
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I don't even have a problem with faith. Have faith. Whatever. It's just mildly offensive that it's always God that dictates his actions rather than solely the American people, who have faiths of their own.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah. Now that's an argument that I can respect.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Since we all know the dangers of religious zeal and fundamentalism.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I would rather have one of these than a peaceful Iraq: Working schools, working healthcare, low-unemployment/healthy economy...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=3627531">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And a peacful Iraq is certainly not going to increase the interest rate on government bonds, help pay for my kid's education, or pay the high monthly costs of Nana's prescriptions.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,76507,00.html">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And this is after how many years?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 2 years since the tech stock market collapse. One of the shortest and mildest recessions in history.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Now, as to education...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <rubs hands gleefully>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And we're inclined to credit Bush with this return?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> It's all due to the refund checks, I guess.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I am, yes. I believe that stability at home and lower taxes are a significant contribution.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Have your taxes dropped?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I believe so. I don't really make enough to pay taxes. <grin>
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> But I really really want rich people to pay very little tax so they'll invest in me and my company.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yeah, well, good for you. My taxes look fantastic this year.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I can be the overtaxed middle class.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Are they less that 4 years ago?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Well, Bush wanted to cut taxes a lot more, but the dems wouldn't let him... remember?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Remember that I'm not on the side of democrats - at all.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Understood.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Nor because I want things that democrats seem to want does that mean I want them implemented in the same ways.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'm simply pointing that if you want to target someone responsible for you being overtaxed, Bush is not the best candidate available.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yes, I clearly need to make less money or more money to avoid being taxed. It's my own fault.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And I shouldn't have gotten married, because that didn't help my taxes at all.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> heh heh heh... or get more representatives elected who run on "lower your taxes" platforms.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Which are some republicans and almost no dems.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I wouldn't even mind all the taxes if the money was going places that made me happy. Like, not Iraq.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It is, I think, a perfectly valid (albeit IMHO dangerous) position to believe that 9/11 was a completely isolated incident, that Saddam Hussein and his ilk did not contribute to it and events like it, and we would have been better off not toppling his regime and concentrating instead on domestic issues.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> hmm.. rephrase.... that however much they did or did not contribute to it, the risk of another attack is less than the magnitude of existing domestic problems.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yes, that phrasing is better.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> and, by the way, I'm in complete agreement that the education system is in shambles, I wish it would become a major target for reform, and by reform I mean drag the leaders of theNEA out of their offices and light them on fire.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There is no doubt that Hussein is evil, and he should have been removed from power and the Iraqi people freed to discover their own government. Just not at our sole expense, and not without immediate, undeniable results.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The NEA?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> National Education Association
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Ok. I thought National Endowment for the Arts. But yes, ok.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Does no incidents of domestic terrorism count as immediate, undeniable results?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> No.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> can't prove a negative, eh?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (them too)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Because I don't believe that attackig Iraq resulted in no domestic terrorism.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <nod> it's a speculative claim to make, I'll conceed.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (conceede?)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> No e.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> right.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> concede.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ah
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> But if he bought back WMDs, THEN I would say, ok, George, you da man. The problem for me is that we should have known where to look before we went knocking around over there.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> well, we kinda did. We knew the location of lots of weapon depots. And we found lots and lots of weapons... just no stockpiles of chemical death.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Oops. Darn.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> We did find seed cultures and the equipment and documentation to rapidly produce vast quantities.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> but no stockpiles.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yet.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> When I spend $100, I don't want to say "Oops. Darn." This is not $100.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I suppose the theory was "better 100 on a 80% bet than 100000 if we ignore it"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> kinda like insurance.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> which you may or may not believe in.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I swear to the almighty powers that my brain aches in a way that is reserved only for political debates.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'll stop.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> It's discussions such as these, where I try to solve the world's problems and realize that no one can, that cause the need to crawl away somewhere.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> or play make-believe in a universe of our own crafting where evil is killed by pointy sticks?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I can't even... I hurt. I want to cry.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> aww...... I'm sorry.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I like make believe and pointy sticks!
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> and death to nasty bad evil!
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Pat is telling me where I can get the job for the guy who takes the pictures for games like Midtown Madness 3.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> cool
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He says it's competitive.
</nod></grin></rubs></sigh></shrug>
[cached_content] =>
[user_id] => 1
[status] => 3
[pubdate] => HabariDateTime Object
(
)
[updated] => HabariDateTime Object
(
)
[modified] => HabariDateTime Object
(
)
[content_type] => 1
[seconds] => 27
[minutes] => 59
[hours] => 16
[mday] => 12
[wday] => 4
[mon] => 8
[year] => 2004
[yday] => 224
[weekday] => Thursday
[month] => August
[0] => 1092344367
[mon0] => 08
[mday0] => 12
)
[fields:protected] => Array
(
[id] => 1919
[slug] => bush-discussion
[title] => Bush Discussion
[guid] => tag:asymptomatic.net,2007:bush-discussion/1174911596
[content] => I had this political discussion with Brian via IM last October. I wonder how much (if at all) his position has changed. I thought it was interesting and thought-provoking enough to repost here, and I suspect that some readers might have reasonable comments.
<hr />
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 1) what was the buffy website addy and 2) we really need to debate us some politics.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Huh?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian (quoting my site):</span> This really isn't new, most people who read this site probably know this. But the new news is that experts on the intelligence gathered in Iraq have now said that while they watched Powell give his case for war to the UN, he must have knowingly liedr [<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/60II/main577975.shtml">Link</a>].
I don't really find this stuff shocking any more. I'm just anxious to get Bush out of the White House. Put in a Democrat for all I care, just get the faith-based senile war-mongering out of my government, and give me back my $87 billion.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Oh, I thought that was in relation to the buffy stuff.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> nah.. two different topics.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> What did you want to say in regard to the Bush garbage I posted this morning?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> That I'm ready and willing to go to bat for him, for his administration, for the case for the war, etc, systematically disprove idiots like the former aid to Powell who spouted that crap, and demonstrate the validity of the case.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Ugh.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> indeed.
<!--more-->
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I can't even start... What... How... Why? Just make a point or something.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Okay.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> September 12th, 2001.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> What happened on that day?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Day after September 11, 2001.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yeah, continue...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> If I asked you on that day if you thought we would make it to October 16, 2003, with no attacks on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, what do you think you would have said?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Well, I know that I wouldn't have said, "Let's beat up on Iraq to make sure that doesn't happen."
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Okay, acknowledged. But do you think you would have said we would make it this long without being attacked?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I would have said, "I really don't know. I wasn't expecting what happened yesterday, either."
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Fair enough. Most people said, that day, that they did expect another major attack in the next two years.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> If he was doing his job to begin with, there probably shouldn't have been the original attack, nes pas?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> But assuming that he is responsible for keeping the country terrorist-event-free, what exactly has he done that has caused this to happen?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, my 1 point is that by taking the battle to somone who was absolutely known to fund and support terrorists (even if you deny the proven al-Queda links, he publicly supported Hammes et. al. in fighting Isreal) and who is guilty of the most *heinous* human rights abuses, we have liberated a large chunk of humanity, and taken the war away from our nation.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Our job as Americans is now to beat up on religious fanatics half way across the world? Please, no.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, no.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The President's job is to remove likely threats to the security of the nation from abroad.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'd say he succeeded admirably.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yes, blowing everyone else up, regardless of their hostile intent or capability, will succfully eliminate external threats.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Yes. And if we blow up the individuals with explicitly stated and demonstrated hostile intent,t hen we're doing one better.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> When was the last time the US made a preemptive attack?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> On a country that could not directly harm us?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Preemptive? What was preemptive about it?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> And I don't mean 9/11
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> If we know so much about the funding that Iraq had done, why didn't we target the terrorists rather than the lame government that funded them?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I mean the last gulf war.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There are no ties between 9/11 and Iraq. None.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Because many of the places that funnel terroristic funding to the US do so under the cover of civil rights organizations.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, yes, there was.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> But, as I said, I didn't mean 9/11 regarding the preemption.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I mean the temporary cease fire in 1991.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> On the provision that they disarm.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> They didn't.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> We finished the job.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Disarm what?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> What did we finish?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There were no weapons found.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> the 1991 war to shut down and aggressive, totalitarian dictator in response for his demonstrated plans of conquest.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Incorrect.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Those that were found were non-functional and forgotten by their government.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> To this point, no large stashes produced bio toxins or nuclear weapons have been found.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Incorrect.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Prove it.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The Kay report lists dozens of material breaches.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> okay!
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10199">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Ok, their first point... only 10 of 130 depots were searched by them. What of the UN inspectors that had searched and found nothing?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, there are no conservatives in Austin. I am armed to the death with triple redundant research from a dozen disparate sources to back this shit up.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Shall I pull up the interviews with Iraqis detailing how the UN was systematicly lied to?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> You can't in one breath say they are the enemy and the next say that they're the ones providing the evidence.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Or how about the latest independent (Zogby and Gallup) polls indicating that despite massive anti-american propaganda, 73% of Iraqi citizens are glad we're there, and want us to stay?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The Iraqi citizenry was never the enemy.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Only the regime.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Polls done by an agency in a country that has what kind of infrastructure? These people hardly have TV, and what they do have is spotty and propagandized. Of COURSE people who are able to talk to Americans will like americans.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> HAve you seen any of the recent blogs from Iraqi citizens?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> They have tv, over a dozen free newspapers, radio, power, cars...
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Of COURSE Iraqis with computers are going to be progressive...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Dude, downtown Baghdad is in better shape than most of Jersey.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (granted, that's not saying much)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Do some polling in the rural areas... Where it's not possible for gallop to get to.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Do you think that the people with guns fighting our soldiers are hanging out near phones waiting to be called by US papers for interviews?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> No... because they're from Syria.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Or Lebanon.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Or Palestine.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And... to back up a second...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yes?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (p.s. those polls were door to door, by hand... not phone)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> You're just illustrating my point that I would rather have my share of the $87b spent to rejuvinate Jersey than buy overpriced bids on Iraqi oil refinery construction.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> And I would counter that, long term, the rebuilding of Germany and Japan generated vastly more revenue than it cost, over the long run.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> That by investing in the generation of a first world country from a third world country, we can get those oil contracts, and hire lots and lots of Americans to work with Iraqis.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Germany and Japan were efficient producers of goods we consumed before that war. Iraq has nothing but oil to benefit us, and it's already been said by our administration that that money will be used by Iraq to rebuild.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Not Japan. Japan made nothing before WW2
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Japan is also not a dustbowl.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The cost of rebuilding is less than the oil revenue.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> neither is Iraq.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> check out some geomaps, especially of the north.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Besides.... it doens't need to produce anything but oil to get wealthy.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> CIA factbook: "Mostly desert...mostly broad plains"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Two words: Tigris and Euphrates.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> More than enough fresh water to support one of the first and largest cities in the world (pre modern era)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Contingent on agreements with Turkey regarding its development.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Technically, California is mostly desert.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> California also seems mostly unrecoverable...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Heh.. I'll agree with you on that one... though hopefully Arnold will stick to his 100 day plan and pull them out of nose dive.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> <shrug>
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Bottom line, dude: Iraq is being rebuilt, the economy is unquestionably back on an upswing, and no terrorist attacks on US soil.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Bush is doing a good job.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (and I can defend the Patriot act too)
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (since I, y'know, read it.)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Only at the cost of the largest deficit ever (if you don't take into account inflation), and the potential loss of a large number of our civil liberties.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 1) Deficit spending helps the economy (c.f. Reagan) and 2) Name one civil liberty lost by the Patriot Act.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Any one.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'll wait.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Did I say Patriot Act?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> TIA.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah.. that.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> So, okay, that is a morally questionable thing.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It's also dead.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yeah, ok. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Besides, it's only a violation of civil liberties if the Constitution defined a "right to Privacy"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It doesn't.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It was invented by the Supreme Court to satisfy Row v. Wade.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Er... the possibility of being carted away and imprisoned indefinately for maybe being fingered by a pissed off neightbor as a terrorist seems to infringe on my rights somehow.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> damn.. that would be scary.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Of course, it has no basis in reality.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Here we go, from the top:
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 1) the Patriot act only applies to non citizens and "enemy combatants"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 2) a citizen can only become and "enemy combatant" if declared as such by John Ashcroft.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> One man, known, recognized, acountable.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 3) the declaration of "enemy combatant" must be upheld by judicial review
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (Well, not necessarily Ashcroft... just whoever happens to be Attorney General)
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 4) Creeping abuse of the PA is rendered highly unlikely, because it has a sunset clause... it autmatically ceases to exist unless explicitly voted to continue to exist by Congress.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Who are known and accountable.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Since I'm of the opinon that somone whom can be proven to have real intent and the capacity to blow up buildings ought to be able to be arrested and interrogated, I believe there ought to be a way to do so, and that way ought to have checks and balances.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Like as outlined by the Patriot Act.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There were ways to do this before the Patriot Act, though, weren't there?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> There were. And that's the whole point. The Patriot act did less to expand the powers as to codify the techniques already being used and methods of inter agency cooperation.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The only real expansion of powers was in regards to non citizens.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The effect, though, has exceeded what you define as the intent, true or not.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Now with all that being said: no bill is perfect, and there are places where tyranical, evil, or stupid men could abuse it. All legislation has that inherrant. Regarding that... see the sunset clause.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Provided it is not amplified with a revival of Patriot 2...
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Why did we wait 10 years to enforce the ceasefire? I assume Clinton was just being lazy and having his cigar toked.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The most damning thing to give incentive for the war was to specify that there were WMDs in Iraq. If we were so sure that they existed, shouldn't we know at least where first to look for them?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Aren't we still in danger until they are found?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> one sec
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> patriot 2, in the form last leaked to the public, was also only applicable to enemy combatants and non citizens
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> we waited because the UN kept saying "you have one more chance" every two years"
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Where exactly is this specified in the original, because I can't find it.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> So why did we suddenly flip and say "We're doing this now"?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> it isn't explicitly stated anywhere, because the whole thing is just a series of deltas to existing laws.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Because it became necessary
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> So to what law does it apply that I can reference that says this magic only works on non-citizens and combatants?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The reason to go into Iraq right now (last year) was becasue we knew he was pursuing and suspected he had illegal weapons.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> We've confirmed acquisition programs and discovered seed programs.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Are we still in danger? yes, albeit much less.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And we've found the evidence of those weapons?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The ones for which we suddenly went to war?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yes: refer to the link I sent you.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Illegal weapons? I don't recall your link referring to weapons that break any UN agreement. I'll reread it.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> there is also this: <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10111">Link</a> but that's speculation, not proof.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (albeit fairly believable speculation with evidence to lend it credence)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> After re-read, there is no mention that the found ordinance was not in compliance with UN restrictions.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10288">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Legal ordinance under UN restrictions even included, IIRC, scub missles with limited range.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> half way down
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> though the whole article is quite telling.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Neat. Let's not give in to the "Leftist Lie Factory". This is obviously unbiased reporting. Cite another source.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> How can I take seriously a publication that has "New leftist cheers on baby-killer" on it's home page. HA!
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <sigh>
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Do you know who David Horowitz is?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He didn't write that article.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> in no particular order: ignoring the obvious counter bias in the article I sent you, what are the facts (as oppsed to opinions) that it outlines?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 2) regarding the David Horowitz headline, the one about the baby killer... do you know who he is?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He's a rights activist.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/02/kay.report/">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> That's what I've been looking for...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Yes. He is one of the most irrefutable commentators on the right, because he used to be the most erudite commentator on the left.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Since I do not know this man, I can only say that I don't value the summaries as written by his cohorts as much as I would this CNN article with Kay's own words.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> "We have not yet found stocks of weapons, but we are not yet at the point where we can say definitively either that such weapon stocks do not exist or that they existed before the war and our only task is to find where they have gone. "
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Understood... though, point of clarification: he doesn't run the site, he's simply the local star commentator. the authors of the articles, compiled from many publications, write the blurbs.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> that comment has to do with stocks of undeclared bio weapons.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It doesn't cover declared and found bioweapons or the resources, materials, and fascilities to generate bioweapons.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He's the editor of the site, actually.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Yes.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'm not sure if he personally picks the articles that go up
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I give up. You win. I pledge my allegiance to our president. I'll vote for him next year. I don't want to think about this any more. I have enough problems without trying to figure out when Iraqi planes are going to fall from the sky with water balloons filled with anthrax.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> heh heh heh.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> How about an acknowledgment that it's not as simply as "Bush is evil" and "Invading Iraq was just a ploy for him and his friends to get rich", and we'll let it lie there. (for now)
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Besides, I'm only making these comments because you made public comments on your site, hmm?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> That's not even what I'm saying. That's not even what upsets me.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And it wasn't even... I was just summing up the article that I read in a snarky way...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Well, your calling him a warmonger, and the "anybody but Bush" feel is what set me off.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yes, I do feel that way, but the results are not those you point to.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> The results
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (see what snarkyness gets you?)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> to get him and his friends rich.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah... the whole "faith" thing?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I think that regardless of whether the war was warranted, we had a lot of internal problems that he could have addressed while still managing the terror issue (in a way better than I perceive it to have been handled, however correct/incorrect).
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I don't even have a problem with faith. Have faith. Whatever. It's just mildly offensive that it's always God that dictates his actions rather than solely the American people, who have faiths of their own.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah. Now that's an argument that I can respect.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Since we all know the dangers of religious zeal and fundamentalism.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I would rather have one of these than a peaceful Iraq: Working schools, working healthcare, low-unemployment/healthy economy...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=3627531">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And a peacful Iraq is certainly not going to increase the interest rate on government bonds, help pay for my kid's education, or pay the high monthly costs of Nana's prescriptions.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,76507,00.html">Link</a>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And this is after how many years?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> 2 years since the tech stock market collapse. One of the shortest and mildest recessions in history.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Now, as to education...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <rubs hands gleefully>
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And we're inclined to credit Bush with this return?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> It's all due to the refund checks, I guess.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I am, yes. I believe that stability at home and lower taxes are a significant contribution.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Have your taxes dropped?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I believe so. I don't really make enough to pay taxes. <grin>
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> But I really really want rich people to pay very little tax so they'll invest in me and my company.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yeah, well, good for you. My taxes look fantastic this year.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I can be the overtaxed middle class.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Are they less that 4 years ago?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ...
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Well, Bush wanted to cut taxes a lot more, but the dems wouldn't let him... remember?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Remember that I'm not on the side of democrats - at all.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Understood.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Nor because I want things that democrats seem to want does that mean I want them implemented in the same ways.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'm simply pointing that if you want to target someone responsible for you being overtaxed, Bush is not the best candidate available.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Yes, I clearly need to make less money or more money to avoid being taxed. It's my own fault.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> And I shouldn't have gotten married, because that didn't help my taxes at all.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> heh heh heh... or get more representatives elected who run on "lower your taxes" platforms.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Which are some republicans and almost no dems.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I wouldn't even mind all the taxes if the money was going places that made me happy. Like, not Iraq.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> It is, I think, a perfectly valid (albeit IMHO dangerous) position to believe that 9/11 was a completely isolated incident, that Saddam Hussein and his ilk did not contribute to it and events like it, and we would have been better off not toppling his regime and concentrating instead on domestic issues.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> hmm.. rephrase.... that however much they did or did not contribute to it, the risk of another attack is less than the magnitude of existing domestic problems.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yes, that phrasing is better.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> and, by the way, I'm in complete agreement that the education system is in shambles, I wish it would become a major target for reform, and by reform I mean drag the leaders of theNEA out of their offices and light them on fire.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> There is no doubt that Hussein is evil, and he should have been removed from power and the Iraqi people freed to discover their own government. Just not at our sole expense, and not without immediate, undeniable results.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> The NEA?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> National Education Association
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Ok. I thought National Endowment for the Arts. But yes, ok.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Does no incidents of domestic terrorism count as immediate, undeniable results?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> No.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> Ah.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> can't prove a negative, eh?
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (them too)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Because I don't believe that attackig Iraq resulted in no domestic terrorism.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> <nod> it's a speculative claim to make, I'll conceed.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> (conceede?)
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> No e.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> right.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> concede.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> ah
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> But if he bought back WMDs, THEN I would say, ok, George, you da man. The problem for me is that we should have known where to look before we went knocking around over there.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> well, we kinda did. We knew the location of lots of weapon depots. And we found lots and lots of weapons... just no stockpiles of chemical death.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Oops. Darn.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> We did find seed cultures and the equipment and documentation to rapidly produce vast quantities.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> but no stockpiles.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> yet.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> When I spend $100, I don't want to say "Oops. Darn." This is not $100.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I suppose the theory was "better 100 on a 80% bet than 100000 if we ignore it"
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> kinda like insurance.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> which you may or may not believe in.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I swear to the almighty powers that my brain aches in a way that is reserved only for political debates.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I'll stop.
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> It's discussions such as these, where I try to solve the world's problems and realize that no one can, that cause the need to crawl away somewhere.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> or play make-believe in a universe of our own crafting where evil is killed by pointy sticks?
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> I can't even... I hurt. I want to cry.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> aww...... I'm sorry.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> I like make believe and pointy sticks!
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> and death to nasty bad evil!
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> Pat is telling me where I can get the job for the guy who takes the pictures for games like Midtown Madness 3.
<span style="color:#2162D2">Brian:</span> cool
<span style="color:#21D238">Owen:</span> He says it's competitive.
</nod></grin></rubs></sigh></shrug>
[cached_content] =>
[user_id] => 1
[status] => 3
[pubdate] => HabariDateTime Object
(
)
[upd |
So, let's see... still no WMDs, though the seed culture facts and the possibility of them being in Syria remain.
Still no domestic terrorist attacks.
Farenheit 9/11 has been just about completely torn apart and reduced to smoldering ash.
Still no Patriot Act violations of civil liberties, according to Amnesty International (unless you count Padilla and Lindh, and I don't.)
Abu Gharib was obnoxious, but frankly fell way short of any classical definition of torture... I mean, we have the other side doing public beheadings fer gosh sakes. It was arguably legal torture, and in no case to be lauded or tollerated.
Sub Note: West Virginians are apparently into freakier sexcapades than I am. this worries me.
What else... hmm.. not John Kerry, it's just not sporting going after such an easy target... how about the Oil for Food scandal, where tens of billions were skimmed into the private pockets of Kofi Annan's kid, Chirac, and others, providing a pretty damning economic incentive for everyone in the international community who said no to the war to have done so?
Plus, of course, we deffered to the "international community" (read: France and the UN on Iran) and look where that is getting us - open defiance, a breaking of the seals, material and personal aid to the Iraqi insurrection...
If Bush wins, Iran goes down within 10 years, garaunteed. Yes, I think this is a good thing. He looses, they have nukes within 10 years, garaunteed. I hope everyone thinks this is a bad thing.
Sum Up: Still voting for Bush, more confidant than before of the rightness of the whole thing (Transition to power on time, Najaf is about ironed out) and happy to discuss these issues with anyone who cares to come along.