Post #98,579
4/24/03 3:25:11 PM
|
Rumsfeld: "Any government you want, unless we say no."
Rumsfeld assures Iraqi's they will be free to form their own government, unless they want an Iran-style Theocracy.
[link|http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=128235&BCCode=BNFRONTPG&newsdate=4/24/2003|http://www.timesunio...ewsdate=4/24/2003]
Not that *I* would want another Iran kicking about either, but does he ever THINK about what he's saying?
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #98,580
4/24/03 3:26:20 PM
|
Ah, El Rumperista
What a guy. Makes you want to pick a fight with an irritable longshoreman.
-drl
|
Post #98,596
4/24/03 4:44:37 PM
|
Re: Ah, El Rumperista
Am I missing something or does it sound like he's calling for a few good ex-Saddam men to come forward and start running things again and save us from the mullahs? Which would be the more ironic regime-change outcome of our righteous efforts to trigger sweeping change and bring US-style democracy to the region -- an Iran-style fundamentalist theocracy ("one blazing point of light"), or the installation of another ba'athist strongman regime ("a compassionate reactionary", "a kinder, gentler stalinism")?
Speaking in his Pentagon conference room, Rumsfeld also said that U.S. and British forces are searching for many more former members of the Saddam Hussein regime than the 55 on a "most wanted" list.
"In fact we have a list of some 200," he said. "That original list was purposely kept low at the outset because we wanted to separate the worst people from the regime, hoping that others would come forward."
Rumsfeld said more of the top 55 have been captured in the past day or so than have been made public. He said their identities will be revealed as soon as they are confirmed through interrogation or other means.
|
Post #98,615
4/24/03 7:22:11 PM
|
Tariq just stepped forward :-)
He might be the man to help out ?
Doug
Spectres from our past: Beware the future when your children & theirs come after you for what you may have been willing to condone today - dsm 2003
Motivational: When performing activities, ask yourself if the person you most want to be would do, or say, it - dsm 2003
|
Post #98,618
4/24/03 7:32:42 PM
|
He most certainly does think about what he's saying.
Just not from the angle of "gee, how are they gonna react to this?"
----------------------------------------------------------------
Victory was the answer - to a great many problems.
When the facts speak for themselves, only a fool insists on having a debate.
The future is leaving the station, the US is at the throttle, and the Left isn't on board.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfire...arlowe/index.html]
|
Post #98,624
4/24/03 8:12:24 PM
|
So, you agree
Iraq is not to get a democratic government.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #98,717
4/25/03 10:37:45 AM
|
Was there EVER any doubt?
"Middle-eastern Democracy" is to oxymorons in the 2000's what "Marketing Genius" was in the '90s.
jb4
"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."
Rich Cook
|
Post #98,665
4/25/03 2:43:58 AM
|
Why of course, dear boy - WTF does what They 'want' have to
do with any operation of Nation Building by the Masters of Bizness?! Why those uppity ragheads must have fallen for the bait {guffaw} - why.. why they musta Believed.. [!]
{snort}
We were doin it to free them poor sufferin Iraqi Peepul from that Evil Sinful ex-Murican-ally who went baad. So suddenly and all, and after all our Help, too!
(Do people that dumb deserve self-government like ours? Why that would mean: their New Leader would have to be elected by <25% of eligible new Murican-style part-time voters. Any larger turnout would be Different, thus un-Murican - ergo clearly subversive. We'd best supervise Reeel Closely. Til about 2013, say.)
Cute of you to make so clear where their 'reaction' belongs, in any Scheme of things. Not that this is any surprise, mind you.
|
Post #98,684
4/25/03 8:17:46 AM
|
No, he doesn't.
There are plenty of ways to say "we're going to make sure that they don't set up a totalitarian regime based on extremist Islam" without appearing to contradict their promise of "free, democratic elections." I mean, even a token effort at sincerity would be better than getting up there and spouting the first impulse that comes to mind.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #99,649
5/1/03 11:50:20 AM
|
What other angle has any meaning at all?
Communication is about eliciting a desired response.
If you aren't thinking about that response when you are composing your output, you are babbling.
When one of the options is "by shooting at our troops" and another is "by cooperating in pursuit of our objectives that cannot be atained without their cooperation" the question "gee, how are they gonna react to this?" is not some silly PC thing. You don't refrain from saying what needs to be said, you don't lie, but you speak with great care and precision.
When you are a professional communicator in a position like that, for every single on-the-record word you utter, you have a duty to think. You owe it to your country in the same sense that a soldier owes his obedience to lawful orders. And for the same reason - lives and the future of your country (or, in this case, the country we are either liberating or consigning to yet another bloody dictator) are on the line.
----
Whatever
|
Post #98,628
4/24/03 8:29:31 PM
|
Full interview is here.
[link|http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030424-secdef0125.html|Here] at the Pentagon. [...]
Q: What are your concerns about when you are working towards that interim authority to have other people in the country (Inaudible.) the Iranian supported Shiite, the people that have moved in. Do you have concerns about that? And do you have any concerns about maybe Iraq might choose to have a Theocracy? Could the United States accept that?
Rumsfeld: Well, I guess you get into the question, well what do you mean by a Theocracy precisely. So you get into a definitional issue. I think the important thing to think of is. Take Afghanistan. It is enormously unhelpful if a Taliban from outside the country try to influence Afghanistan. It\ufffds unhelpful if the Iranian\ufffds try to subvert what\ufffds going on in Afghanistan.
We wouldn\ufffdt like it if our neighbors were trying to influence what\ufffds happening inside our country. So what you want to try to do is to have external influences muted or eliminated to the extent possible. The Iraqi people I think over time will not want influence from Iran in their country. They won\ufffdt want influence from Syria in their country. Now there will be some people who will. There are Ba\ufffdath party members who would like to have influence from the Ba\ufffdath party in Syria. There will be some people who may be pro-Iranian who would like that but the broad center of gravity in that country is not going to want their neighbors to be running their country.
Q: May I follow up on an Afghanistan --
Rumsfeld: You know what I would like to have.
Q: Would you like to elaborate on that? I didn\ufffdt mean it in a --
Rumsfeld: Well I think that you asked how do we feel about it. We feel that that\ufffds not a good idea and the neighboring countries ought not to try an influence the outcome of the situation there. Over time the Iraqi\ufffds are going to figure out a way to manage their future and it will be consistent with the principles that we set out. A single country, a country that doesn\ufffdt have weapons of mass destruction, doesn\ufffdt threaten its neighbors and is respectful of the rights of minorities and religious diversity in the country.
And there\ufffdll be some sort of a representative government that will evolve and a non-dictatorial, a non-repressive government. And if you are suggesting how would we feel about an Iranian type government, with a few clerics running everything in the country. The answer is, that ain\ufffdt gonna happen, I just don\ufffdt see how that\ufffds going to happen.
[...] In context, it seems to me that he's saying that the US won't accept Iran dictating what type of government that Iraq has. And that seems to me to be a resonable position. Regards, Scott.
|
Post #98,693
4/25/03 9:37:46 AM
|
Of course it is...
In context, it seems to me that he's saying that the US won't accept Iran dictating what type of government that Iraq has. And that seems to me to be a resonable position.
the question is, who decides that Iran has dictated what kind of government Iraq has? (And based on what evidence?)
|
Post #98,745
4/25/03 12:55:48 PM
|
Its to our advantage that we're not Iraq's neighbor
Well I think that you asked how do we feel about it. We feel that that\ufffds not a good idea and the neighboring countries ought not to try an influence the outcome of the situation there. Over time the Iraqi\ufffds are going to figure out a way to manage their future and it will be consistent with the principles that we set out. A single country, a country that doesn\ufffdt have weapons of mass destruction, doesn\ufffdt threaten its neighbors and is respectful of the rights of minorities and religious diversity in the country.
Now, "we" obviously hold a personal bias toward "our principles." But is Rummy intentionally missing the obvious irony in his statement. We don't think Iraq will want their gov't to be influenced by outside states... so we, as an outside state will do more than influence, we'll dictate. ughgh... Iraq isn't quite the Virgin Islands, but as a colony it'll offer something completely different. mx. "I'm man enough to tell you that I can't put my finger on
exactly what my philosophy is now, but I'm flexible."
-- Malcolm X
|
