(WalterM140) wrote in message ...
I love the argument techniques of the dedicated liberal.

Already reduced to name calling, Ed?

General Zinni is not a liberal.


apparently, he's a registered republican who's seen the light. a
recovering republican, you might say.

i just saw him on charlie rose and he did brilliantly, despite
charlie's insatiable need to interrupt with mindless blathering (add
is not an excuse). but i did disagree with him on one important
point, with regards to the likelyhood of civil war in iraq. he was
surprised that certain major attacks in the past months on the shiites
didn't incite civil war right then, and of the "restraint" they
showed, and worried that that restraint may disappear in the near
term. it's not so much restraint as it is APATHY, in my opinion.
from what i've read, this is the key byproduct from 3 decades of
saddam's trauma-inducing rule and while it's a factor preventing
democracy from taking to the sky in iraq right now, it's also a factor
that's inhibiting full-blown civil war. i think using terms like
"anarchy" is a much more accurate way of framing this issue.









He strongly urged that we not invade Iraq, Al
Quaida or no.

Walt