What bureaucrats you talkin' 'bout? Argentine Customs?
[QUOTE=Jackson]Been there, done that!
And if you are successful, you will experience an enormous sense of personal satisfaction in having created something of value, a feeling that no government bureaucrat will ever understand, along with a belief that no one has any right to confiscate any part of what you've created, regardless of what sophistry they may employ to justify their intent.[/QUOTE]Your superiority over lesser mortals as demonstrated by your business acumen should give you great comfort. Too bad it is diluted, when you are coerced to give up some of your hard won treasure, because elected representatives were given that authority by your fellow citizens. And their blood-sucking bureaucrats do the dirty work. Oh the horror!
Those inferior people who have intentionally pursued less fulfilling work than entrepreneurs just can't get no satisfaction. They live diminished lives leaving nothing behind. The living dead is what they are!
It all goes back to that subversive book the Bible. If only Christ had not engaged in his infuriating sophistry in the Sermon on the Mount and his many other naive and misguided pronouncements, maybe no one would be so jazzed up about helping their fellow man and we wouldn't have to pay all these taxes.
Why in heaven's name did he go and say "You cannot serve God and wealth" and "if anyone wants to take away your tunic, let him have your cloak" and "do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth".
Worst of all he said ""it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."
What a duffuss! What moralistic bullshit! And it has been used as an excuse to rob from the rich to give to the poor for centuries.
Now along comes Obama - the New Messiah! Will it never end?
From your keyboard to God's ear
[QUOTE=Jackson]Sunday, January 20, 2013[/QUOTE]The wheels are coming off. This might possibly become the all-time earliest lame duck in history. If America gets lucky, we will see a watershed midterm election next year and chairman Maobama will get early retirement (which we will pay for, of course)
Cold Warriors Go Ballistic, when Obama Doesn't
Obama has cancelled the "Star Wars" missile defense deployment in Eastern Europe, proposed by the Bush Administration, and will replace it with a more practical and less expensive alternative.
Obama's decision to scrap the controversial system came after a unanimous recommendation by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Pentagon.
Republican leaders, who used to argue that Presidents should listen to their generals, say Obama is "appeasing Russia" and "weakening our national security" by listening to his generals. Go figure!
Obama's Defense Secretary Robert Gates (a Republican holdover from the Bush Team) answered critics stating: "those who say we are scrapping missile defense in Europe are either misinformed or misrepresenting the reality of what we are doing." He added Obama's new plan "provides a better missile defense capability" and will be operational seven years sooner than the Bush plan.
Case closed one might think, but one would be wrong. Reality and logic will not sway the President's critics. Get ready for Dick Cheney to re-emerge from his bunker to mutter and sputter how Obama has surrendered to Putin, stabbed US allies in the back and will get nothing in return, etc.
Looked at objectively, it was clear that the Bush plan was aimed at a threat that didn't exist, using missile technology that hadn't been proved to work. Bush was willing to deploy an unproven, enormously expensive system for reasons that had less to do with protecting the Europeans, than US domestic politics.
The plan served three key conservative political objectives. First, was Republican affiliated defense industry financial interests, second, the "Star Wars" system cultists in the party who, as an article of faith, clung to Reagan's imaginary high-tech "umbrella" protecting good nations against the missiles launched by rogue nations and third, the need to keep both the mythology of the Cold War and the "existential threat" from Islamist terror alive, as clubs to beat up Democrats whenever they might suggest cooperating with Russia or talking with Iran makes sense.
In order to bully or buy support, the Bush team had threatened its way across Europe and bribed Polish and Czech government and military officials, who lusted for the billions of US taxpayer dollars that were promised. As normal, Bush could care less that the vast majority of citizens in Poland, the Czech Republic and all across Europe opposed him. Most NATO member states were either opposed or non-committal, as well. If America wanted it that was enough.
Now, Obama has proposed an alternative approach to effectively reducing the threat from long-range missile attacks - using cheaper, more reliable, proven, ready-to-deploy, scaled to the actual threat technology.
On the issue, he has managed the Pentagon masterfully. He has listened to US allies who wanted the Bush plan to disappear. In his no drama Obama way, he put down another marker in his fight against the decades-long Republican-led wasteful and dangerous welfare system for defense systems contractors. He has, as he promised he would, "reset the default button" with Russia.
Finally, he has moved the country a major step forward towards a sane and responsible foreign policy.
Even if no concessions from the Russians result, this is the right decision. Saving money and reducing unnecessary antagonisms with Moscow and our European allies alone make it the smart play.
Of course, the right wing dinosaurs that hate the fact that the Cold War ended are apoplectic. Which is another sign O man is right.
Obama didn't want or select the date. The decision had been leaked
[QUOTE=Doppelganger]Perhaps you are correct, perhaps not as we can argue the point forever as we are both dedicated to our points of view.
BUT. Could he not have made his decision public on another day rather than on the anniversary of Russia's invasion of the country?[/QUOTE]Reports have made it clear the Administration rushed to get the Obama, Gates and Mullen statements out after someone leaked the story.
There were people in Poland and the Czech Republic who saw big bucks disappear as a result of this and they had an incentive to embarrass Obama with a leak to the press on this exact date. Or some savvy Cold Warrior with a knowledge of history who learned what was up and dropped a dime.
It's how revenge politics works.
The date is ironic but insignificant
It is the action (inaction) that is so damaging.
Wildman --- On this one you don't have a clue what you're talking about!
Here is the background on the Reagan / Bush multi-billion dollar boondoggle "Star Wars" missile system's track record of test delays, failed launches, missed targets and cost over-runs.
The system was supposed to cost $47 billion to develop. Instead between 2002 and 2009 a total of $63 billion was spent on research, testing and evaluation. (I think Jackson was billed for most of that! And the system still doesn't work.
You decry "inaction" when Obama takes decisive action to stop throwing billions down a rat hole. As Hillary said if Obama was seen walking on water his critics would say "see he can't swim."
Of course, maybe you know more about missiles than 10 nobel lauriate scientists do. But, rather than just knee-jerk dissing of Obama, read what follows and learn something.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Story from Ian Sample, the science correspondent of the London Guardian Newspaper.
Writes Mr. Sample:
"For a system designed to protect the country from nuclear oblivion, the US national missile defense project's history of failure has long raised eyebrows among scientists.
"Years of testing have seen rocket-propelled interceptors refuse to launch from their silos, fail to separate from their boosters and miss their targets, sometimes by hundreds of miles.
"Military officials can claim only a 50% hit rate, and only then in tests that are far removed from a real world attack scenario, said David Wright, a physicist and co-director of global security at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
"Some tests were delayed for months because the weather was not considered good enough for the interceptor to find its target.
"When tests did go ahead, missile operators knew when the target would be launched and its trajectory in the sky. The missile system that was due to be installed in Europe had undergone even less rigorous testing. The plans included a two-stage interceptor which has yet to even begin flight tests.
"The radar intended to be installed in the Czech Republic has been used in tests to track targets from its base in the Kwajalein atoll in the Pacific Ocean. Technical studies by scientists at Massachusetts Institute of Technology show that Pentagon estimates of the radar's ability to detect incoming missiles from Iran were off by a factor of 100. The missiles would have produced too small a radar signature to be spotted in time.
"Wright said it was reasonable to assume Iran would be capable of confounding interceptor missiles that rely on heat-seeking infra-red sensors to home in on their targets. "They will definitely be motivated to work on counter-measures and they could defeat the interceptor's sensors," he said.
"When people say how well the system works, the truth is it is impossible to know how well it will work because there's no realistic data," Wright added.
"Twenty leading scientists, including 10 Nobel laureates, wrote to President Obama in July to urge the administration to reconsider the European phase of the missile defense system.
"The planned European missile defense system would have essentially no capability to defend against a real missile attack. Independent and US governmental technical analyses have shown that any country that could field a long-range missile could also add decoys and other counter-measures to that missile that would defeat a defence system like that being proposed for Europe," the letter stated.
"The Obama administration's revised plan will use the Aegis ship-based weapons system, which could launch SM-3 interceptor missiles from the Mediterranean sea. The system is scheduled to be deployed in 2011."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You know I actually thought Bush did a few good things like his helping Africa fight HIV. I said so at the time.
You might try being even-handed too. That way reasonable people won't think you're a whack job!
Former Bush officials won't go away
Barack Obama's speeches are getting right to the point of distribution in the USA.
Can't get away from the leeches.
His administration is a success.
Dick Cheney is in the hospital for surgery. I never heard from them during the administration. Karl Rove is on tv from time to time. Don Rumsfled and Karl Rove pulled in for questioning. Don Rumsfeld facing several international criminal trials and civil lawsuits.
He is cutting out much of the fat. Big deals going his way. Next election wondering who's for him, who's against.
Update - Russia Cancels Missile Deployments - Poles support Obama
Russia has announced it will remove it's short-range missiles from Kaliningrad in response to Obama's decision to eliminate the Bush plan to install US missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic.
A Medeved spokesman said: "Reason has prevailed over ambitions. Naturally we will cancel countermeasures which Russia has planned in response."
Meanwhile, although Republicans and the US right wing press portrayed Obama's decision to cancel missiles based in Poland as "turning our back on an ally", the Polish people applaud it.
A new poll shows strong support for the move among the Poles with 48% of respondents saying decision was good and only 31% disagreeing. While 58% , agree the move would have no impact on Poland's security.
The Red Menace Is Back! Where's Ronnie?
[QUOTE=Sidney]Lies, from dictators that never honor contracts! But O means well![/QUOTE]Did I miss something?
Do Republican Presidents have problems with "premature exclamation." In addition to W, did Reagan claim "Mission Accomplished" before the job was done?
I thought Ronnie destroyed that evil commie empire when he almost single-handedly won the Cold War. Are you telling me the bastards are still hiding under my bed?
Here I saw the O Man turning good intentions into good policy.
He defuses a pointless and dangerous pissing contest with Russia - dumps a useless weapons system - that non-ideologues or guys not on the take from contractors in the Pentagon didn't want - because it doesn't work - one the recipient countries were bribed to take when they had opposed the idea - for use against threats the people in those countries don't fear - because the threats don't exist - and he saves tens of billions of tax dollars.
He goes ahead with a plan to use weapons that do work - that the generals in the Pentagon designed - that NATO and our key European allies prefer - that are scaled to the actual threat.
(Is it a good or bad thing that a lower Pentagon missile budget may mean Jackson can have more money to use on his own missile!
But, for some, if it's the O man, a good thing just ain't good enough!
Strange world we live in!
Queso – Your Thoughtful Comments Deserve A Similar Response
[QUOTE=El Queso] "I can understand people having an opinion on it based on what both "sides" have published."
EXACTLY AND LOTS OF WHAT IS BEING WRITTEN IS OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS, NOT SPIN.
"Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic, et al. The position that you have taken seems to me to be a little simplistic and flawed and what I often see as a problem with people who consider themselves "do-gooders"
ALTHOUGH I LIKE TO DO GOOD, CALLING ME A "DO GOODER" – AS SOME FELLOW POSTERS DO – IS A MEANS OF INDICATING MY "SOFT" SENTIMENTS TAINT MY ANALYSIS.
I CONSIDER MYSELF A REALIST WHO FINDS IDEOLOGY DANGEROUS AND TIRESOME.
PROPOSING THAT PEOPLE AND GOVERNMENTS SHOULD WORK TO MINIMIZE CONFLICT AND MAXIMIZE COOPERATION WHILE KEEPING THEIR EYES OPEN IS GOOD, PLAIN OLD COMMON SENSE.
MY VIEWS ON THE RUSSIA, POLAND, CZECH RELATIONSHIP ARE SHARED AMONG FOREIGN POLICY EXPERTS FROM COLIN POWELL, ZBIG BREZINSKI, SCOWCROFT, ETC. THEY KNOW FAR MORE THAN I DO, SO I WOULD SAY "SIMPLISTIC" ISN'T A FAIR CHARACTERIZATION, "FLAWED" IS A MATTER OF OPINION.
"You make mention of the Cold War"
YES, AND I HAVE SOME FUN AT THE EXPENSE OF THOSE WHO CLAIM REAGAN'S POLICIES WON IT. THAT CLAIM IGNORES SO MUCH OF WHAT HAPPENED TO CAUSE THE IMPLOSION OF THE SOVIET UNION THAT IS CAN CORRECTLY BE CALLED "SIMPLISTIC" AND "FLAWED."
WHAT WAS THE MAIN CAUSE WAS THAT THE COMMUNIST SYSTEM OF ECONOMIC CONTROL SELF-IMPLODED. THE INTERNAL DYSFUNCTIONALITY OF THE SYSTEM FINALLY CAUGHT UP WITH REALITY. REAGAN WAS IN THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME TO GET SOME UNDESERVED CREDIT.
THE ONLY INFLUENCE OF THE US THAT PUSHED THE SOVIETS TOWARD COLLAPSE WAS THE INSANE MILITARY SPENDING BY BOTH ADVERSARIES. FOR EXAMPLE, EVER EXPANDING NUCLEAR ARSENALS ON EACH SIDE WHILE EACH ALREADY HAD ENOUGH BOMBS TO EVAPORATE THE WORLD SEVERAL TIMES OVER. THE SOVIETS DIDN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO KEEP UP.
NOW OSAMA BIN LADEN IS USING A SIMILAR STRATEGY AGAINST US. HIS DISCOUNT MARKET TERRORISM THREAT HAS GUARANTEED THAT THE US NOW SPENDS MORE ON DEFENSE THAN THE COMBINED SPENDING BY ALL OUR ALLIES AND ADVERSARIES. THE FRAUD, WASTE AND ABUSE CAN BE MEASURED IN THE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS.
THE US HAS BEEN ON THE ROAD THAT BROUGHT THE SOVIETS TO THEIR KNEES – CHOKING ON WASTEFUL MILITARY SPENDING, PURSUING AN EMPIRE IT DOESN'T NEED AND CAN'T AFFORD.
THE NEVER-ENDING DRAIN ON THE US ECONOMY IS A BIG PART OF WHY DEFICITS ARE OUT OF CONTROL AND MONEY FOR CRITICAL NON-MILITARY EXPENSES ARE DWINDLING RAPIDLY.
A LOOK BACK AT WHAT WAS REALLY GOING ON ON OUR SIDE AS THE SOVIET UNION SELF-DESTRUCTED IS VERY REVEALING. RECENTLY UNCOVERED DOCUMENTS PROVE CONCLUSIVELY THAT, ALTHOUGH REAGAN HAD CRIED "TEAR DOWN THAT WALL" IN PUBLIC - IN SECRET MARGARET THATCHER AND GEORGE H. W. BUSH, TRIED TO GET GORBIE TO KEEP THE BERLIN WALL STANDING.
SO MUCH FOR WANTING TO DESTROY THE EVIL EMPIRE. THE FUCKING HYPOCRITES. WHAT THEY WANTED WAS TO KEEP THEIR RESPECTIVE MILITARY MACHINES HUMMING, GENERATING POLITICAL SUPPORT AND FINANCIAL BACKING. THE LAST THING WAR HAWKS WANT IS PEACE.
"The Allies won the first against Germany? Why was there a second?
MOST HISTORIANS SAY THE MAJOR CAUSE WAS THE PEACE AGREEMENTS AFTER WWI WERE SO DAMAGING TO GERMANY, THAT THE RESENTMENT GAVE AN OPENING FOR HITLER TO COME ALONG AND APPEAL TO GERMAN NATIONALISM AND CREATE HIS FASCIST STATE.
"To me, it seems that you cavalierly dismiss one thing that IS good about keeping the plan the way it was under Bush; that is, to make our allies in Eastern Europe feel safe and to help ensure they remain our allies (and not Russia's, for example) against WHATEVER threat may arise from that region."
IF YOU READ ABOUT THE EVOLUTION OF THE BUSH PLAN IT DID NOT MAKE OUR ALLIES FEEL SAFE, JUST THE OPPOSITE. IT WAS OPPOSED BY EVERY MAJOR NATO MEMBER. THEY FELT IT MADE RELATIONS BETWEEN THEM AND RUSSIA MORE DANGEROUS. THEY DON'T SHARE THE US HYSTERIA ON IRAN AND NOTE IRAN NEVER INVADED A NEIGHBOR (UNLIKE THE US)
THE RIGHT WING GOVERNMENTS IN POLAND AND THE CZECH REPUBLIC BOUGHT INTO THE PLAN FOR FINANCIAL AND IDEOLOGICAL REASONS. THE CZECH PARTY WHO SUPPORTED THE BUSH DEAL LOST RECENT LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS.
WE SHOULDN'T SPEND BILLIONS TO MAKE ANYONE 'FEEL' SAFE. WE CAN'T AFFORD POLICIES BASED ON FEELINGS. THE NEW OBAMA PLAN USING PROVEN TECHNOLOGY WILL ACTUALLY MAKE THINGS SAFER. PEOPLE WILL NOW HAVE REAL REASON TO FEEL SAFE.
"THEY remember the Soviet Union. THEY remember what it means to live next to that rumbling giant and to be affected directly. I don't think the governments, or the people who run the governments, have forgotten."
MOST OF EUROPE HAS MOVED PAST WWII. VIRTUALLY EVERY EU GOVERNMENT IS DOING MORE AND MORE BUSINESS WITH RUSSIA – ESPECIALLY SEEING AS RUSSIA'S ENERGY SUPPLIES ARE CRITICAL TO THE EU ECONOMY.
POLAND IS A BIT OF AN EXCEPTION FOR OBVIOUS HISTORICAL REASONS. RUSSIA AND POLAND GET ALONG LIKE ARGENTINA AND URUGUAY ON STEROIDS!
ALSO, BUSH SAID FROM DAY ONE ON THAT THE MISSILES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA.
"You castigate those of us who really do not like the government to take our own money. To "redistribute wealth" from the rich to the poor by force."
I DON'T MEAN TO 'CASTIGATE' ANYONE, BUT I DO POINT OUT THAT AS CITIZENS OF A DEMOCRACY ALL OF US HAVE IMPLICITLY AGREED TO GIVE GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY OVER US IN A RANGE OF AREAS, INCLUDING THE POWER TO TAX US. I LIKE TO PAY TAXES AS MUCH OR AS LITTLE AS THE NEXT GUY.
THE GOVERNMENT ISN'T TAKING OUR MONEY BY "FORCE." AS A CITIZEN YOU "VOLUNTEER" TO PAY TAXES. THE LEVEL YOU PAY IS DETERMINED AS ELECTED OFFICIALS GOVERN, BASED ON WHAT THEY BELIEVE THEIR CONSTITUENTS WANT.
ELECTIONS ARE HOW THOSE OFFICIALS ARE CHOSEN. IF A MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THE DECISIONS THEY CAN REMOVE THEM AT THE NEXT ELECTION. IF THEY GET RE-ELECTED THAT MEANS THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS ACTUALLY AGREE WITH THEIR DECISIONS.
SINCE THE 1930'S THE US TAX SYSTEM HAS BEEN PROGRESSIVE – MEANING THE WEALTHY SUPPOSEDLY PAY MORE THAN THE POOR (ALTHOUGH IT DOESN'T WORK OUT THAT WAY ALL THE TIME) AGAIN IF THE PEOPLE DON'T LIKE IT, THEY NEED TO VOTE AND CHANGE THE LEADERS.
PEOPLE CAN ALWAYS MOVE TO ANOTHER COUNTRY IF THEY TRULY ARE UNHAPPY AND THE ELECTORATE CONTINUES TO SUPPORT POLITICIANS WHO MAKE DECISIONS THEY DON'T LIKE.
MY PROBLEM IS A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO IGNORE THE LAST ELECTION WHERE OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS WERE CHOSEN BY A LARGE PROPORTION OF AMERICANS. ELECTIONS HAVE WINNERS AND LOSERS. THIS TIME THE LOSERS ARE BEHAVING LIKE SOMEHOW THE COUNTRY HAS BEEN STOLEN.
I ASSURE YOU THE KIND OF ATTACKS THAT ARE BEING USED ON OBAMA ARE NOT GOING TO GET MODERATES AND INDEPENDENTS TO GO WITH THE EXTREMISTS IN 2010 OR 2012.
THE D'S MAY LOSE IF THE ECONOMY IS NOT MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, BUT THE R'S CAN BLOW IT IF THEY SERVE UP THE UGLY STUFF THAT THE VOTERS REJECTED IN 2006 AND 2008.
"Poland and the Czech Republic. Shouldn't we be worried about government-to-government relations."
GOVERNMENTS HAVE SHORT MEMORIES. US / POLISH / CZECH RELATIONS WILL BE FINE BEFORE YOUR COFFEE GETS COLD.
"Did Gorbachev and Perestroika emerge as a result of the pressure that the US kept on the USSR over DECADES?"
ADDRESSED ABOVE.
Your argument that we should be nice guys, play "fair" with Russia to make them like us, and ignore the Polish and Czech government and listen to their people is flawed.
How much are we really saving in moving these systems out of these countries and is it worth some possible hard feelings on the part of our allies?"
I DON'T ARGUE WE SHOULD BE NICE GUYS, I COULD GIVE A FUCK IF RUSSIA LIKES US. GOVERNMENTS DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER. THEY ARE NOT TENNIS PARTNERS.
BUT WE SHOULD BE SMART GUYS. A MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR MISSILE SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T WORK IS DUMB - PLAIN AND SIMPLE. DUMPING IT HAS LITTLE TO DO WITH RUSSIA ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. IF WE GET SOMETHING IN RETURN FROM THEM, THAT IS ICING ON THE CAKE.
IF YOU HAD FOLLOWED HOW THE POLISH AND CZECH GOVERNMENTS WERE BROUGHT INTO THE BUSH DEAL, YOU WOULD SEE THAT THEY REALLY WENT ALONG FOR FINANCIAL REASONS. THEY KNOW THE TECHNOLOGY IS DUBIOUS AT BEST, BUT FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS THEY SAW BILLIONS OF YOUR AND MY DOLLARS BEING SPREAD AROUND GETTING THEM VOTES (AND DACHAS TOO PROBABLY)
WE WILL SAVE AT LEAST $4 BILLION AS A START BY KILLING THE PLAN. WE WILL SPEND SOME MORE MONEY IN BOTH COUNTRIES ON LESS STUPID THINGS TO BUY OFF THEIR POLITICIANS AND EVERYONE WILL BE LOVEY DOVEY IN NO TIME. YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO THE BANK – THEY WILL![/QUOTE] THE FIRST RULE OF FOREIGN POLICY WAS STATED BY MICHAEL CORLEONE - "IT'S NOTHING PERSONAL, IT'S ONLY BUSINESS!"
HAVEN'T YOU NOTICED HOW THE US IS CHAVEZ' NUMBER ONE OIL CUSTOMER TODAY AND HAS BEEN SINCE HE CAME TO POWER. NO AMERICAN I KNOW SAYS WE SHOULD TELL THE VENEZUELAN DUFFOS TO KEEP HIS OIL AND GO FUCK OFF.
It's hard for me to maintain my equanimity when exposed to wisdom incarnate!
[QUOTE=Sidney]My friend, how naive are you?[/QUOTE]With such in depth analysis and cogent discussion points as well!
Who pray tell do these citations refer to?
[QUOTE=Sidney]''What the sociologists and Hitler are telling us is that by the time facts become clear, people are emotionally wedded to the beliefs planted by the propaganda and find it a wrenching experience to free themselves. It is more comfortable, instead, to denounce the truth-tellers than the liars whom the truth-tellers expose''
[url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23498.htm[/url]
===========================================
Under the current administration, it is increasingly difficult to know who the enemy is, but what is certain is that the latest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) is a brilliantly executed psychological warfare by way of misinformation.
[url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18837.htm[/url][/QUOTE]They seem like the intellectual equivalents of the fun-house mirrors of our youth!
Nothing written here refers to believing Russia about anything!
[QUOTE=Sidney]My friend, how naive are you?[/QUOTE]Time for new reading glasses, Sid!
I get why you asked me to explain why I would believe anything from Russia!
Looking over my post to Queso I will guess you refer to the revelations about Thatcher and Bush wanting the Berlin Wall to stand.
I guess you wish to cast doubt on the newly discovered contemporaneous minutes from the Russian archives of the meetings and discussions I referred to, where Maggie expressed opposition to the unification of Germany to Gorbie.
The notes do not stand alone. They reinforce and are consistent with prior revelations, documents and material from German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, French President Mitterand and her own private Secretary Charles Powell.
The Russian documents provide missing details that reflect her secret attempt to derail a unified Germany that she thought was not in Britain's best interests.
Kohl and Mitterand have addressed her intransigence in their memoirs, as has Powell whose notes from that time period reflect her strong opinions.
I know that the Iron Lady is apparently suffering from Alzhiemer's Disease. Still, that doesn't fully explain the lack of any disclaimer from her people of the veracity of the archive documents. George Bush Senior hasn't issued a denial of their veracity. He still has his faculties, as far as I know.
It is not necessary to believe the Russian material, but there seems to be no reason to dismiss it, seeing as it is consistent with other verified information.
The role of historians is not to ignore documents based on one's prejudices, but to put together pieces of a puzzle to create a coherent picture based on all the information available. In that vein, the Russian documents have been accepted at face value by the British media and commentariat.
Maybe I should ask: "Please explain why you would believe anything from Bush / Cheney"?"
If the Russkies made up the Thatcher notes (putting aside why they didn't use them to discredit her before) they would be like the CIA-connected "yellow cake" guys who in 2002 doctored Nigerian official paperwork trying to make it look like Saddam bought it to make nukes.
The counterfeit documents were so poorly forged that Italian experts immediately figured it out and informed US intelligence. But that didn't stop the fraudulent information from being used by Bush / Cheney / Rice et al to sell the American public their WMD bullshit, so we could go to war against Iraq.
I again ask - Why would you or any half way sentient person believe anything from Bush / Cheney"?"
Now if Putin announces tomorrow that the sun rises in the east, should we take that as a false, ethnocentric boast?
And be careful defending Maggie here in BA, you may never get laid again!
Obama hits the talk show circuit Sunday morning
Here are the line-ups for the Sunday talk shows this weekend:
• ABC, This Week: President Barack Obama.
• CBS, Face The Nation: President Barack Obama.
• CNN, State Of The Union: President Barack Obama; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
• Fox News Sunday: ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA); FedEx CEO Fred Smith, and Moody's Economy. Com chief economist Mark Zandi.
• NBC, Meet The Press: President Barack Obama; House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
