We gave them their freedom and misery, let the people of Iraq handle it from here.
Demonstrations Turn Violent in Iraq
Time to leave Iraq.
We gave them their freedom and misery, let the people of Iraq handle it from here.
Demonstrations Turn Violent in Iraq
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
*faceIraq*
Maybe our military could swing by Libya on their way out, and bring home the US citizens trying to get the hell outta there.
Fixed.Originally Posted by GGT
We're going to have to keep a military presence there as a "security umbrella" for them for quite some time. Today's demonstrations didn't really cost the US any lives.
Are you willing to increase taxes in order to pay for this umbrella?
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
We have much larger deployments around the globe for much older wars. Currently, every US soldier is supposed to leave Iraq by the end of the year, but I bet the Iraqi government will negotiate for a reduced force to stay for longer; my bets are on 20k or so. The cost of maintaining 20k troops in Iraq who little to no warfighting is relatively cheap, and might be worth the money if we can build and keep friendly relations with the Iraqi government and population. We have far more troops in Europe, Japan, and South Korea.
Are we still supporting dictators in the middle-east?
Protest Organizers Ordered to Shut Offices in Iraq
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
No need; eliminate the Dept of Commerce. We can get rid of jobs like this.
How does it feel to pay taxes for someone's $120,000/year - $170,000/year job doing the accounting for a branch of the government dedicated to corporate welfare and the proliferation of meaningless studies?ob Title: Deputy Chief Financial Officer
Department: Department Of Commerce
Agency: Bureau of Industry and Security
Sub Agency: Bureau of Industry & Security
Job Announcement Number: BIS-DA-2011-0005
SALARY RANGE:
$119,554.00 - $179,700.00 /year
OPEN PERIOD:
Monday, February 07, 2011 to Monday, March 07, 2011
SERIES & GRADE:
ES-0505-99/99
POSITION INFORMATION:
This is a Full-Time position in the Senior Executive Service (SES). This is a Permanent SES Career-Reserved position.
PROMOTION POTENTIAL:
00
DUTY LOCATIONS:
1 vacancy(s) in one of the following locations: Washington DC Metro Area, DC
WHO MAY BE CONSIDERED:
Applications will be accepted from All Qualified Individuals
(U.S. Citizens Only)
JOB SUMMARY:
The historic mission of the Department of Commerce is "to foster, promote, and develop the foreign and domestic commerce" of the United States. This has evolved, as a result of legislative and administrative additions, to encompass broadly the responsibility to foster, serve, and promote the Nation's economic development and technological advancement.
The mission of the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is to advance U.S. national security, foreign policy, and economic objectives by ensuring an effective export control and treaty compliance system and promoting continued U.S. strategic technology leadership.
The Office of Administration serves as the principal advisor to the Under Secretary and the Deputy Under Secretary on financial and management policy for the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). The Office of Administration develops BIS strategic plans and multi-year performance measures in cooperation with the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration and the Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement, and in accordance with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993; formulates, presents and executes the BIS budget; conducts management and program reviews of BIS headquarters, domestic units, and international units to assess the accomplishment of performance measures and program effectiveness; effects financial and budgetary controls; provides financial reporting and financial internal controls in accordance with the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982, and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars A-50 and A-123; prepares formal financial statements in conformance with the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and other OMB requirements; administers the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act of 1974; implements policies and procedures for personnel, physical, and information security; coordinates all BIS activities related to safety and the emergency preparedness program, particularly as applicable to Executive Order 12656; and acts as the focal point for the Government Accountability Office and Departmental Inspector General audit activities. The Office of Administration also coordinates human resources management activities, including time-and-attendance controls, workforce planning, career development, employee recognition, and performance management.
http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.as...02-07+08:59:00
I'm surprised at your lack of commitment to your beliefs. If you took it seriously you would have at least mentioned the cost of the associated bureaucracy to try to make your point. Maybe if you eliminated 1000 such bureaucracies you might put a dent in the cost of the umbrella.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
Doesn't quite work that way.
Doesn't quite work that way.
Indeed.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
We should really leave Iraq to become chaotic, that would serve our agenda.
Our agenda? What is our agenda? Supporting dictators for stability instead of encouraging democracy with its messiness?
Become chaotic? We made it chaotic.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
You know, at some point, the means no longer justify the ends. It's all nice and well to try to prevent Iraq from becoming more chaotic, but we know we have very little chance of success, while the cost of ongoing operations is certain. We shouldn't be doing things just because we feel an obligation to do them, especially when the odds of success are incredibly low. If 8 years isn't enough to resolve the problem using our methods, 13 or 18 years won't help either.
Are those two mutually exclusive? How much influence do we have over dictators with whom we have poor relations? Have you not noticed how the situations in Tunisia and Egypt differ from the one in Libya?
Hope is the denial of reality
I'd argue we've made a lot of progress, and that progress will have more of a positive lasting impact than if we cut-out now.
Tell me what progress we can realistically expect in 5 years if our troops stay.
Hope is the denial of reality
Sure, I've noticed the differences. I also notice the glaring fact that we're already involved in two protracted, unfunded, extremely expensive and unpopular wars in the region.
As great as it sounds for the US to help rebels trying to overthrow dictators....we are stretched too thin. Our "agenda" can't simply be to intervene militarily everywhere oppressed people have need, or every place that's fighting for democracy. We really need to stop thinking of the US as the world's savior and military might. IMO.
Interesting. You're simultaneously calling for us to stop acting as the world's policeman and to promote democracy in the world. You don't see a contradiction there?
Hope is the denial of reality
Can you spell it out for me? Because I can't.
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Promoting democracy (against the wishes of the dictators in which we'd want to promote it) is nothing less than a global crusade that is both costly and antagonistic to large chunks of the world (including the democratic parts, who consider the exercise to be one of the imperialism).
The people in charge were worrying about the colonels, who have more direct access to (and loyalty from) the soldiers. Most of those colonels were educated in the US.
Hope is the denial of reality
I think we have a confusion of terms here. Finland's foreign policy promotes democracy, we broker deals and lend support and so on. But for obvious reasons we can't be world policemen; we can't project any force. And frankly I'm not opposed to that situation, our one go at being colonialists didn't go too well. For us or the peoples being colonized.
Either way, I'd argue the terms are separate and shouldn't be used interchangeably.
Of course you can just respond that Finland could say their foreign policy promotes turning the Moon into cheese for all that we can actually accomplish, but I'm not sure how true that is.
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
That's not what Americans means by promoting democracy. What do you to do if a dictator doesn't allow you to promote democracy in their country?
Hope is the denial of reality
I said we are stretched too thin to continue acting as the world's police. I've also said we should get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Even if we had the money, which we don't, we should reconsider our "agenda" and our policies. Promoting democracy doesn't necessarily mean military intervention. Even Tunisia and Egypt have politely suggested we butt out, this is their fight. Statements from Obama or other diplomats and ambassadors are welcomed, though. NATO and the UN have a role.
I'm not keen on the politicians now calling for arming rebels, no-fly zones, or bombing air strips. And for all the foreign aid we give, maybe it should be for humanitarian relief or resettling refugees. Not weapons, tanks, tear gas, or bombs. What's contradictory about that?
What do YOU think our role is?
I fail to see the relation between foreign aid and humanitarian assistance. It's not like we're short-changing the latter to increase the former. And your views are still highly contradictory. What happens if a dictator doesn't allow us to promote democracy in his country? Do we cut off relations with every dictatorship that does this?
Hope is the denial of reality
Sending a hospital ship is different from sending an aircraft carrier. Foreign aid that goes to dictators doesn't necessarily mean better roads or schools for people, if they're using that money to buy tanks or pay soldiers, or their own Swiss bank account.
Contrary to popular American belief, democracy will find its own way in the Information Age. We don't have to start it for them. Well, unless we decide to send up more satellites or build cell towers, or drop free phones from helicopters instead of propaganda pamphlets. See: Tunisia, Yemen, Egypt, etc.
We give them aid because we need their support on some issues. Would you rather the US ignored every country in the world that's ruled by a dictator (that would also entail ignoring the UN Security Council, which includes several dictators)?
Pray tell how you think the dictators of those countries woudl react to such a blatant violation of their sovereignty.
Hope is the denial of reality
Ah, the "agenda". We give aid because we need their support on "some issues", not because we are champions of liberty or representative democracy.
How about you cut to the chase, Dr. Loki, and tell us all what US foreign policy should be, particularly in the middle east. That's what you really want to do. It's got nothing to do with my own opinion or how "contradictory" you think I am.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote