General Zinni on Sixty Minutes

Correction:

Zinni strongly supported the Clinton line (he helped develop it), and
continues to refuse to admit the line was wrong.

Surprising? No.

Steve Swartz

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

Walt

From: "Leslie Swartz"

Zinni strongly supported the Clinton line (he helped develop it), and
continues to refuse to admit the line was wrong.

Why wrong? I don't think the Clinton "line" produced 5,000 battle casualties.

We've been in Iraq for 14 months. To whom are we giving control of the country
on 6/30/04?

No one knows.

I don't need a 4 star general to tell me that this is a disaster.

Walt

In article ,
(WalterM140) wrote:

From: "Leslie Swartz"

Zinni strongly supported the Clinton line (he helped develop it), and
continues to refuse to admit the line was wrong.

Why wrong? I don't think the Clinton "line" produced 5,000 battle
casualties.

We've been in Iraq for 14 months. To whom are we giving control of the
country
on 6/30/04?

No one knows.

I don't need a 4 star general to tell me that this is a disaster.

On the other hand, the folks who are telling us things like "this is a
disaster" are cut from the same cloth as the people who were telling us
that there would be upwards of a half-*million* dead during the conflict
and in the months afterwards, with the "smart money" coming in at over a
hundred thousand (the low estimate by most antiwar folks was 20,000 or
so dead, but that was the extreme lowball by the more optimistic folks),
with a half-million or more refugees flooding the neighboring countries.

UNHCR said there would be *900,000* refugees from the war, that all
health, food, and water distribution would be effectively shut down for
a long time, creating a huge humanitarian catastrophe with upwards of a
half-million direct physical casualties. Epidemics and pandemics of
cholera and dysentery were supposed to happen. Three million people
were supposed to be in need of "therapeutic" feedings due to food
shortages.

How about this little bit of prognostication?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...nsequences/200
3/0214grimpict.htm

Note the complete lack of these events coming to pass...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad:

"Cut from the same cloth" is a little too polite. These are (mainly?
all?) the same damn people *directly* responsible for the failed policies
that made our current effort in large part necessary.

Zinni, Clark, Clarke, Clinton, Gore, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum ad vomitum.

To hear them now spouting off about the current effort to clean up their
mess is indeed quite "ironical," isn't it? I mean, like Jamie Gorelick
spoutning off about intelligence failures because the FBI and CIA didn't
share enough information . . .

TWILIGHT ZONE!

Steve Swartz



"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
(WalterM140) wrote:

From: "Leslie Swartz"

Zinni strongly supported the Clinton line (he helped develop it), and
continues to refuse to admit the line was wrong.

Why wrong? I don't think the Clinton "line" produced 5,000 battle
casualties.

We've been in Iraq for 14 months. To whom are we giving control of the
country
on 6/30/04?

No one knows.

I don't need a 4 star general to tell me that this is a disaster.

On the other hand, the folks who are telling us things like "this is a
disaster" are cut from the same cloth as the people who were telling us
that there would be upwards of a half-*million* dead during the conflict
and in the months afterwards, with the "smart money" coming in at over a
hundred thousand (the low estimate by most antiwar folks was 20,000 or
so dead, but that was the extreme lowball by the more optimistic folks),
with a half-million or more refugees flooding the neighboring countries.

UNHCR said there would be *900,000* refugees from the war, that all
health, food, and water distribution would be effectively shut down for
a long time, creating a huge humanitarian catastrophe with upwards of a
half-million direct physical casualties. Epidemics and pandemics of
cholera and dysentery were supposed to happen. Three million people
were supposed to be in need of "therapeutic" feedings due to food
shortages.

How about this little bit of prognostication?

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...nsequences/200
3/0214grimpict.htm

Note the complete lack of these events coming to pass...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Zinni, Clark, Clarke, Clinton, Gore, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum ad vomitum.

To hear them now spouting off about the current effort to clean up their
mess is indeed quite "ironical," isn't it? I mean, like Jamie Gorelick
spoutning off about intelligence failures because the FBI and CIA didn't
share enough information . . .

TWILIGHT ZONE!

Steve Swartz


They weren't arrogant and stupid enough to invade Iraq.

"Bush arguably has committed the greatest strategic blunder in modern memory.
To put it bluntly, he attacked the wrong target. While he boasts of removing
Saddam Hussein from power, he did far more than that. He decapitated the
government of a country that was not directly threatening the United States
and, in so doing, bogged down a huge percentage of our military in a region
that never has known peace. Our military is being forced to trade away its
maneuverability in the wider war against terrorism while being placed on the
defensive in a single country that never will fully accept its presence."

-- James Webb

Walt:

You do understand that when you change the subject (as with this
sub-thread), most of us assume you are ceding the original point. Just
thought I'd remind you. The new issue you introduce ("wrongness" of Clinton
policy) has already been handled elsewhere.

As to Zinni's credentials/opinion (the original point), are you ceding
that his participation in creating the "Other" policy (failed or not) has
more to do with his current opinion than any rational analysis of the facts?
You know, the "Clarke Effect?"

Steve Swartz


"WalterM140" wrote in message
...
From: "Leslie Swartz"

Zinni strongly supported the Clinton line (he helped develop it), and
continues to refuse to admit the line was wrong.

Why wrong? I don't think the Clinton "line" produced 5,000 battle
casualties.

We've been in Iraq for 14 months. To whom are we giving control of the
country
on 6/30/04?

No one knows.

I don't need a 4 star general to tell me that this is a disaster.

Walt

You do understand that when you change the subject (as with this
sub-thread), most of us assume you are ceding the original point.

Which was what?

Just
thought I'd remind you.

Just thought I'd remind -you- that the Bush administration is arrogant and
incompetent.

George Bush Jr. is the -worst- president we've ever had.

Walt