Even Rove is admitting that Bush's approval rating is taking a pummeling because of the war.
But I don't think you even bothered to look at question 7. 66% of the respondents disapprove of Bush's handling of the war, vs 32% that approve. Believe what you want about the specific reasons for the overall dismal ratings, but the American people don't like the job Bush is doing in Iraq.
The point is, the US is not going to stay in Iraq for very much longer, regardless of the President's "resolve". He doesn't have the political capital to escalate, and as soon as he's out of office, the next president is going to pull the plug.
I was really glad to read about how easy it is to replace the HD.
Some of you might also find this interesting: step-by-step take apart. Text is in Japanese, but fortunately the pictures are in English. =) Click on the left hand picture. Looks like the whole unit is much easier to disassemble than were previous 'books.
Look, do us all a favor. Spend a couple of evenings studying asymmetric warfare before coming back here. I'm sorry to say it, but you're both naive and unknowledgeable.
A commander in chief who has pretty much lost political support for the war, and who won't be in office in a few years.
The reason why you're struggling against the comparisons to Vietnam is that you're repeating the exact same arguments that were given during that conflict.
The insurgency is succeeding in their goal of preventing the US from stabilizing Iraq. True, we (the US) have made milestones towards the goal of stabilizing Iraq (elections, as you mention), but we won't really have achieved success until and unless we can leave Iraq a stable democratic nation. If we don't achieve this goal, then the milestones don't mean shit.
And it's going to be a very difficult goal to achieve, no matter the determination of our troops and how many troops we throw at the problem. The fact that the civilian leaders have screwed up so bad makes it even more difficult.
Two (out of I-don't-know-how-many) principles of asymmetric warfare is to use whatever technology you have and to examine the technology of the enemies for weaknesses to exploit. I'm not sure where you get the idea that a guerilla fighter "isn't supposed to use technology".
We threatened them that we would hit them in the head with a 2 x 4 if they didn't give in to our demands, so we were forced to hit them with it. And then they hit us back with a 2 x 4!! Why didn't they have the decency to threaten us back during the threaten phase? Don't these people play by the rules?
Btw - how can you 'fiend' for methadone? I am geniunly curious to know what you meant.
It's drug slang, based on the phrase "drug fiend". "I was fiending for some doritos" = "I desired some doritos with the same fervor that a drug addict needs drugs". It implies that the subject is going thru withdrawals and needs the object to avoid being sick. See also "jones" and "jonesing".
I think it's funny that the anonymous writer has brought the use of the slang term back to the realm of hard drug use after the term has become more generalized to refer to any object of desire or need.
Actually, Open Source Nuclear Weapons is an interesting idea. If every man, woman, and child could carry around their own personal nuclear warhead, I think we as individuals would become much more polite in short order. We'd also care a lot more about our fellow man, since we wouldn't want anyone to become too upset. Injustice would become a thing of the past.
Maybe they can do it like a magic ticket promotion. Like one in ten has the coupon for free upgrade. And then you could have a grand prize ticket that entitled you to a tour of the chocolate factory with Bill being your personal tour guide.
I have to say, though, that it is impossible to have effective oversight of a program like this.
This is were we disagree. I think it is possible, although I'm willing to admit that it won't ever be perfect. The important thing is to expect attempts at abuse and constantly monitor for them.
But please understand that I am sympathetic to your point. Maybe I'm a sell out because I think that somewhere there is a technically feasible compromise between Liberty and Security, or even that there can be any compromise at all. If these tools exist, these tools will get used. With oversight and controls, we can limit the abuse.
Well, this system would remove at least one of the excuses the Bush Administration is using to ignore FISA via EO.
The call logging already occurs within TPCs, so that's not going to stop. However, I agree with you at least partly. All these programs must be brought to a halt until a system with proper and effective oversight and with safety mechanisms in place is created. Those who were involved with overstepping of legal boundaries must be removed from their positions of power. If this means the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, then so be it.
At his confirmation hearing today, General Hayden complained that the security/intelligence services had become a political football, preventing them from doing their jobs. This is basically his fault, as well as Bush and Cheney's fault. If they had done things properly from the start, complying with the Constitution instead of trying skirting around it on the flimsiest of pretexts, they wouldn't have this problem.
And you know what? That troubles me. How can we trust him to head up the CIA, when his actions at the NSA (at the behest of the administration) have clearly compromised the NSA's operational effectiveness? (Let alone compromised out civil liberties.)
I work on K street jackass, how about the "banking" section up a G street. and preferably around noon so it will be cleared out by rush hour.
Doesn't it give you the creeps being in close vicinity to so many lobbyists? If I had to work on K street, I think I'd be battling the taste of vomit in the back of my throat all day long.
Actually, this could be integrated into the FISA court quite easily, so there's your oversight.
Further, there was another (discarded) component of the program that would have automated oversight.
Would or could (if they decide to bring this back) any of this be perfect and avoid abuses? Maybe, maybe not. But it would be a hell of a lot better than the current set up, which is constitutional abuse in and of itself.
There was another component of ThinThread that "would have employed an automated auditing system to monitor how analysts handled the information, in order to prevent misuse and improve efficiency." Did you RTFA?
I think the point is to keep the NSA from knowing whose phone records it's looking at, not to protect them in case they fall into the "wrong hands".
Depending on the circumstances, how do you make the distinction between the NSA and the "wrong hands"? =)
But seriously, ThinThread as originally constituted contains the mechanism necessary for oversight. It's amazing that they dispensed with that part of the program, especially now in hindsight when the Administration is embroiled in a scandal. What were they thinking? Are they that arrogant? That stupid?
Slashdot Mirror
Even Rove is admitting that Bush's approval rating is taking a pummeling because of the war.
But I don't think you even bothered to look at question 7. 66% of the respondents disapprove of Bush's handling of the war, vs 32% that approve. Believe what you want about the specific reasons for the overall dismal ratings, but the American people don't like the job Bush is doing in Iraq.
The point is, the US is not going to stay in Iraq for very much longer, regardless of the President's "resolve". He doesn't have the political capital to escalate, and as soon as he's out of office, the next president is going to pull the plug.
I was really glad to read about how easy it is to replace the HD.
Some of you might also find this interesting: step-by-step take apart. Text is in Japanese, but fortunately the pictures are in English. =) Click on the left hand picture. Looks like the whole unit is much easier to disassemble than were previous 'books.
Now Dick Cheney will be hunting me down for my RNC card.
You'll need a new one anyway, after he shoots you in the face. =)
No, he addressed your point. You're missing his.
Look, do us all a favor. Spend a couple of evenings studying asymmetric warfare before coming back here. I'm sorry to say it, but you're both naive and unknowledgeable.
Great. A page of PDFs. What's in the PDFs? Overly optimistic assessments?
Let me show you some data that points to the US getting out of Iraq as soon as politically palatable:
USA TODAY/Gallup poll results, note question #7.
What does it all mean? Here's what VOA says.
A commander in chief who has pretty much lost political support for the war, and who won't be in office in a few years.
The reason why you're struggling against the comparisons to Vietnam is that you're repeating the exact same arguments that were given during that conflict.
The insurgency is succeeding in their goal of preventing the US from stabilizing Iraq. True, we (the US) have made milestones towards the goal of stabilizing Iraq (elections, as you mention), but we won't really have achieved success until and unless we can leave Iraq a stable democratic nation. If we don't achieve this goal, then the milestones don't mean shit.
And it's going to be a very difficult goal to achieve, no matter the determination of our troops and how many troops we throw at the problem. The fact that the civilian leaders have screwed up so bad makes it even more difficult.
Remember, appropriate technology! For the jungle, you want a mesh network.
Two (out of I-don't-know-how-many) principles of asymmetric warfare is to use whatever technology you have and to examine the technology of the enemies for weaknesses to exploit. I'm not sure where you get the idea that a guerilla fighter "isn't supposed to use technology".
And even a guy with a spear is using technology.
I obviously need to start watching more TV or something...
Why? Are you fiending? =)
No, you just need to hang out with people who are a bad influence, until you become a bad influence yourself. =)
Maybe the penalty for loosing would be a tightening?
Translation of Creative's reaction:
We threatened them that we would hit them in the head with a 2 x 4 if they didn't give in to our demands, so we were forced to hit them with it. And then they hit us back with a 2 x 4!! Why didn't they have the decency to threaten us back during the threaten phase? Don't these people play by the rules?
Btw - how can you 'fiend' for methadone? I am geniunly curious to know what you meant.
It's drug slang, based on the phrase "drug fiend". "I was fiending for some doritos" = "I desired some doritos with the same fervor that a drug addict needs drugs". It implies that the subject is going thru withdrawals and needs the object to avoid being sick. See also "jones" and "jonesing".
I think it's funny that the anonymous writer has brought the use of the slang term back to the realm of hard drug use after the term has become more generalized to refer to any object of desire or need.
Oh, I forgot to footnote. The idea is stolen from a Bruce Sterling short story. ("The Sword of Damocles" in Globalhead)
Actually, Open Source Nuclear Weapons is an interesting idea. If every man, woman, and child could carry around their own personal nuclear warhead, I think we as individuals would become much more polite in short order. We'd also care a lot more about our fellow man, since we wouldn't want anyone to become too upset. Injustice would become a thing of the past.
So how the fuck am I going to get my toast just the way I like it?! XP? Sorry, but I'm not going to eat any virus laden toast, not if I can help it.
Maybe they can do it like a magic ticket promotion. Like one in ten has the coupon for free upgrade. And then you could have a grand prize ticket that entitled you to a tour of the chocolate factory with Bill being your personal tour guide.
What happens when you're trying to toast cracked wheat bread and you get a kernel panic?
Indeed, the technology itself is over 40 years old.
I have to say, though, that it is impossible to have effective oversight of a program like this.
This is were we disagree. I think it is possible, although I'm willing to admit that it won't ever be perfect. The important thing is to expect attempts at abuse and constantly monitor for them.
But please understand that I am sympathetic to your point. Maybe I'm a sell out because I think that somewhere there is a technically feasible compromise between Liberty and Security, or even that there can be any compromise at all. If these tools exist, these tools will get used. With oversight and controls, we can limit the abuse.
"Your house just burned down, your family was murdered, tell us how you feel"
.*
[in a shocked disbelieving voice] wait, go back to the part about my agent coming over . . .
*punchline to an old Hollywood joke about actors and agents
Well, this system would remove at least one of the excuses the Bush Administration is using to ignore FISA via EO.
The call logging already occurs within TPCs, so that's not going to stop. However, I agree with you at least partly. All these programs must be brought to a halt until a system with proper and effective oversight and with safety mechanisms in place is created. Those who were involved with overstepping of legal boundaries must be removed from their positions of power. If this means the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, then so be it.
At his confirmation hearing today, General Hayden complained that the security/intelligence services had become a political football, preventing them from doing their jobs. This is basically his fault, as well as Bush and Cheney's fault. If they had done things properly from the start, complying with the Constitution instead of trying skirting around it on the flimsiest of pretexts, they wouldn't have this problem.
And you know what? That troubles me. How can we trust him to head up the CIA, when his actions at the NSA (at the behest of the administration) have clearly compromised the NSA's operational effectiveness? (Let alone compromised out civil liberties.)
I work on K street jackass, how about the "banking" section up a G street. and preferably around noon so it will be cleared out by rush hour.
Doesn't it give you the creeps being in close vicinity to so many lobbyists? If I had to work on K street, I think I'd be battling the taste of vomit in the back of my throat all day long.
Actually, this could be integrated into the FISA court quite easily, so there's your oversight.
Further, there was another (discarded) component of the program that would have automated oversight.
Would or could (if they decide to bring this back) any of this be perfect and avoid abuses? Maybe, maybe not. But it would be a hell of a lot better than the current set up, which is constitutional abuse in and of itself.
There was another component of ThinThread that "would have employed an automated auditing system to monitor how analysts handled the information, in order to prevent misuse and improve efficiency." Did you RTFA?
I think the point is to keep the NSA from knowing whose phone records it's looking at, not to protect them in case they fall into the "wrong hands".
Depending on the circumstances, how do you make the distinction between the NSA and the "wrong hands"? =)
But seriously, ThinThread as originally constituted contains the mechanism necessary for oversight. It's amazing that they dispensed with that part of the program, especially now in hindsight when the Administration is embroiled in a scandal. What were they thinking? Are they that arrogant? That stupid?