The bush administration has added clarke to the 'axis of evil'. What more does fint need to know. ;)

Hold on there HP; the Bush administration has added clarke to the 'Axis of Weasels' . . .wow. . and he aint even french. :cool:

Unfortunately a whole series of Democratic presidents tried that without success. Repeating a failure over and over expecting different results is usually defined as insanity....or liberalism. [/B][/QUOTE]
You mean Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford and Regan!

Hmm, looks like Woodwards new book really backs up alot of what Richard Clarke said and wrote about Bush, Cheney, and the rest of that ilk.

Stealing funds from Afghanistan to start war preparations in Iraq, the lying about the WMD's, forcing Powell to go lie to the UN...on and on. These guys have pulled the wool over your eyes! wake up and smell the roses!

Geoff

So you consider reading modern fiction the way to an education? That explains a lot.

Do you have the faintest idea what we are debating?
How could you possibly think that Reagan failed to spend enough on defense to cause the Soviet Union fall?

That is a cheap shot at a good book, Flint. The man spent 20 years working with seven presidents, both republicans or democrats. He teaches graduate students a course on national securtity now. He knows more about terrorism than you will ever know, especially since you won`t read his book. You can disagree with him, but your argumentation would hold more value if you could come up with something else than `he writes fiction`.
Actually, I beleive that if you could, you would not have to use cheap shots.

Aurel

so now there is the 5 year minimum overhaul of the cia. not to be completed under bush's watch. the ussr collapsed under DEFENSE SPENDING and it was a long time happening. diapered ron had as much to do with it as gore did inventing the internet. clarke and o'neill, the traitorous bastards...

kevin

Seems to me, this man, Clarke, that "spent 20 years working . .. " knows more about puffing up his career than he does terrorism.

From his own mouth, with his 20 years working 'experience', HE FAILED!
. . .well, okay, he didn't fail the part about puffing up his career . . .that he has down pat.

The huge hypocracy, in all of this, is you leftist will believe that Bush is just warring for his career, and yet you all paint a guy like Clarke as just motivated by "it's the right thing to do"

ah. . yeah.:rolleyes:

C'mon Aurel, I bet you know the type . . . that guy who keeps his job by prolonging the problem? . . ..maybe some guy in "research" eh Aurel?

I don't consider it a cheap shot. Just a fair assessment. Almost every major "revelation" from his book has turned out to be false or at the least, inflated. Most Clancy novels are more realistic. He is just out to make a quick buck and I will not aid that pursuit. I will read it when it becomes available in the public library. Besides, what make you think he knows so much or that his book would teach me a thing? Heck, using your reasoning; I worked in national defense longer than he did...for even more presidents...and have also taught several college courses.....will you buy my book?

Yes, I will buy your book, if you give me the references.

Aurel

That is what happens after many years of underfunding and practically dismantling the FBI and CIA. heck, most were using 386 computers and didn't even have internet capability when Bush took office. At least we have been fixing the problem for the last 3 years...Funny how having the "inventor of the internet" in office put important parts of the government so far in computer technology.

Most educated people..including liberals concede that President Reagan's defense spending and his apparent willingness to go to war brought the Soviet Union down.

Thanks! Actually, I currently only have written them on electronic theory and specific weapon systems.....but since you would buy it, I might start one on political issues. I might have to write one blasting the curent adminstration because they seem to sell better.

The ones doing research are Cheney and Wolfowitz, who are experimenting with new concepts such as `how far can we stretch our troops` or `how deep can we run the domestic debt`or `Can I run a war with never serving in the military` ?
Now, those are the true experimentators, but unlike in a lab experiment, they directly test their theories on the full scale, before even knowing if those are going to work...

Aurel

There little experiment is a raving success when it is measured by how much money their benefactors and former employers are making from it.

All government decisions are based on paving the way with money for your friends. The papers are full of stories about Cheney and Wolfowitz and their crazy plans which GW seems to listen too.

Geoff