Posted on 04/21/2006 12:01:43 PM PDT by Howlin
Edited on 04/21/2006 12:47:23 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Nicely put! -They "sold out" TWICE!
Make that, "they're on a mission"
I won't print the whole transcript here, but this is an interesting link: http://www.state.gov/s/p/of/proc/tr/index.cfm?docid=3719.
General Zinni was one of the generals that she traveled with and worked with for her book, The Proconsuls.
One snippet:
>>>> Not only didn’t the Service Chiefs realize how much the job of the CINCs had evolved since the passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Act in 1986, but also the Joint Staff was just beginning to see the larger picture. The White House had snapshots from the crisis du jour. And Congress, I think, really still doesn’t understand. The Goldwaters-Nichols Act was meant to push the notion of joint military operations, to empower one person to order the services to work together. Each and every service chief opposed its passage. It grew directly out of the aborted attempt to rescue American hostages in Tehran, which failed, in part, because the Air Force and the Navy didn’t cooperate. Someone had to be given the power to make the services work together. They were not going to do it on their own. The position of CINC was the logical choice. It made so much sense militarily, and the CINCs’ staffs began to grow to accommodate the shift in authority. But since war is rare -- knock on wood -- the CINCs also got tasked in the post-Cold War with this shaping mission. In fact, that takes up a vast amount of their resources and the majority of a CINC’s time. But [this role] has evolved without a grand strategy or a centralized look and without much of a systematic lash up between other obvious parts of the U.S. Government namely State, Commerce, and Justice.
(snip)
The conventional wisdom is that President Clinton and the military never got along. The reality is, under Clinton’s watch, the military came to outrank its civilian chain of command in influence, authority, and resources in many parts of the world. How did this come about? The Clinton administration’s poor relations with congressional Republicans, especially in the area of foreign policy, led the White House to drop contentious fights over State Department funding and international diplomatic initiatives. They knew that they would get little resistance, however, from Defense committees. Secondly, I think, the management of the State Department under Secretary Albright fed this imbalance. Whatever her legacy abroad, she was unable to make the case for America’s diplomatic corps at home. Its resources, esprit, and innovation continued to plummet. >>>
Is she suggesting the military mess of which she writes is of Carter and Clinton's making???
Pinz
You go STARWISE!!! Excellent work!! Thanks!!!
Good thing you did that.
(I was about to pounce!)
:)
Temporary Spelling Nazi
They don't think they're done yet.
Anybody who doesn't vote straight GOP in 2006 and 2008 is a fool; the thoughts of THESE people, and their powerful network, getting back into power is unconsciousnable.
.
SANDAY BERGER:
-Former Chief Washington, D.C. Lobbyist for Communist China prior to his being appointed White House National Security Advisor.
-Former NSA Advisor to a President of the United States who in his college days was engaged in supporting the side of the Godless Communist Vietnamese, against we Freedom-fighting American Soldiers, during the Vietnam War.
-Former NSA White House Advisor involved in that same President of the United States' personally refusing 3 free offers from the Sudan during the 1990's to give us our No. 1 terrorist enemy OSAMA bin LADEN on a silver platter ...before he could hit us real hard with a new President of the United States sititng in our Oval Office.
-Former NSA Advisor that went on NBC-TV's 'Meet to Press' to personally "Guarantee" the American People that there was "No Way" that his former employer Communist Chinese could get a hold of our precious space satellite and missile technologies when they launched our space hardware from inside their Communist-enslaved country. Which they promptly did.
The Enemy is now within...
...and always has been.
.
I need someone with a military background to explain this to me.
William Goodfellow [Director of the Center for International Studies], "Starvation In
Cambodia," Op-Ed, New York Times, July 14, 1975, p. 25. An excerpt:
The evacuation of Cambodia's larger cities has been sensationalized in the
Western press as a "death march." In fact, it was a journey away from certain death
by starvation, for at the time the former Phnom Penh Government surrendered,
starvation was already a reality in the urban centers, and widespread famine only a
matter of weeks away, while in the countryside there was a sizable food surplus. . . .
The coup d'état of 1970 was followed by five years of death, suffering and
destruction, with 600,000 Cambodians on both sides killed. Primarily because of a
large-scale United States bombing campaign in which 539,129 tons of bombs were
dropped on the Cambodian countryside, the agrarian economy was shattered. . . .
Last March, the director of the United States Agency for International Development in
Cambodia, Norman Sweet, estimated that in Phnom Penh alone 1.2 million people
were in "desperate need" of United States food. . . . A.I.D. officials reported that
stockpiles of rice in Phnom Pehn could last for six days.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:wYomZLIHMasJ:www.understandingpower.com/Chapter3.pdf+William+Goodfellow++subcommittee+on+Asia+++Cambodia+1976&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4&client=firefox-a
Ask and you shall receive:
William Goodfellow, director of the World Policy Institute think tank, is a fierce critic of Bolton. But he agrees that the U.N. is ''a dumping ground for bureaucrats.'' It's the place where governments get jobs for family, tribe and friends, and also the place to send bureaucrats they want to get rid of at home.
But Goodfellow points out that Bolton's undiplomatic style is alienating America's allies and in the process is likely squandering a rare chance to remake the U.N. None of America's allies agree with Bolton's ultimatum on the budget.
http://www.usitalia.info/dettaglio.asp?Art_Id=1139&Art_Tema=%09%09%09%09%09%09%09%09%09%09Comments%20&%20Analysis
Thanks. (I may NEVER get thru this one, it's like a bottomless pit.)
BIG Dem.
Why is that link telling people ...WE ARE FORBIDDEN to see it..?
"The Victim/Whistleblower mantra is already starting...."
Who cares? She's not a whistleblower, she's a Democratic partisan who's had some of the highest security clearances in the land. And she broke the law, and every agreement she ever made to keep secrets, by blabbing to a reporter in an attempt to trash the White House.
And the topper is, the information she gave was a rumour that apparently wasn't true.
Is somebody scrubbing?
Here's some info on Ohio contributions. Don't have specific donors to any individual but don't have time to do any more searches right now:
From FEC 2003-2004 Election Cycle - Ohio
All candidates, all Sources - Dems only:
http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/cancomsrs/
You can do more searches at FEC here:
http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/srssea.shtml
From Opensecrets.org:
Top contributions in-state v.s. out of state:
http://www.opensecrets.org/states/instvsout.asp?State=OH&Year=2004
Money transfers from nat'l party:
Total: $4,574,283 (Democrats 73% ; Republicans 26% )
http://www.opensecrets.org/states/type20.asp?State=OH&Year=2004
Ohio
MONEY SUMMARY, 2003-2004
WHERE THE CANDIDATES
GOT THEIR MONEY, 2003-2004
Ohio $12,489,472
California $1,120,102
New York $507,785
Virginia $461,138
Florida $407,806
Distict of Columbia $383,496
The dollar amounts in "Where the Candidates Got Their Money" reflect the total contributions received by the state's congressional candidates from within the state and from the top five other states. Totals are based on individual donations of more than $200. PAC donations are not included.
http://www.opensecrets.org/states/summary.asp?State=OH&Year=2004
Crawdad wrote~~~Here's a blurb on Ms. Priest's husband: William Goodfellow is the executive director of the Center for International Policy in Washington, DC. The Center sponsors scholarly research and leads activist campaigns to advance policies based on multilateralism, demilitarization, democracy, and respect for human rights. Prior to helping establish the Center for International Policy in 1975, Goodfellow was an associate with the Indochina Resource Center, an anti-war think tank.
I have no clue. Maybe it was hacked. I can't get their now either.
Woo Hoo!
Deinitely - Sam Nunn's group, CSIS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.