Friday, March 24, 2006

Rummy vs. Facts

From American Progress:

"From what I've seen thus far, much of the reporting in the U.S. and abroad has exaggerated the situation [in Iraq]."
-- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, 3/7/06

VS.

"[A]ctually most reporters get it wrong...the situation on the ground is actually worse than the images we project on television."
-- NBC reporter Richard Engel, the only television news correspondent to cover the entire war in Iraq for an American television network from Baghdad, 3/22/06

hmmm interesting who to believe eh?

By Blogger saba, at March 28, 2006 4:45 am  

Nice catch, H. But not a surprise. If the Rummy's mouth is moving, he's lying, just like his boss.

By Anonymous Nostradamnthem, at April 12, 2006 7:17 pm  

Predictable and predicted

Many analysts warned that if the U.S. made claims to the right of preemptive strikes, others would follow suit. They have. From the AP via Common Dreams:


North Korea suggested Tuesday it had the ability to launch a pre-emptive attack on the United States, according to the North's official news agency. A Foreign Ministry spokesman said the North had built atomic weapons to counter the U.S. nuclear threat.

"As we declared, our strong revolutionary might put in place all measures to counter possible U.S. pre-emptive strike," the spokesman said, according to the Korean Central News Agency. "Pre-emptive strike is not the monopoly of the United States."

I wouldn't fear N. Koreas peemptive strikes. But in case of Russia it could happen against Georgia for instance.

By Blogger jin, at March 24, 2006 9:26 pm  

Pre-emption? Bull-shit.

North Korea has niether tha capacity or motivation for a full-out attack on the United States. No nation has. Mutually Assured Destruction or limited nuclear war ring a bell?

The most the DPRK can hope for is attcking bases in South Korea, Japan or maybe sending one or two missiles at the United States - hence the National Missile Defence program that has been revitalised by Bush.

China wouldnnt allow it, and any response by the United States would contain the North.

By Anonymous JMN, at May 07, 2006 4:02 pm  

JMN


The point is one of princible not one of practicle

The concept that due to one nation lowering the bar and taking the stance that pre-emtive strikes are the right thing to do . Other states will then follow.

The message here is one of decreasing world stability based upon current US foreign policy.

It is very easy to take an article too seriously and miss the gentle undertone that the writer is trying to put across

By Blogger _H_, at May 07, 2006 4:17 pm