General Zinni on Sixty Minutes

In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: Ed Rasimus

On 27 May 2004 11:13:38 GMT, (WalterM140) wrote:

Now, all that being said, just who the **** are you to tell me how to
act?


Now Ed, be nice. Remember you are an officer and a gentleman. (grin)


That used to confuse the Army. My mother's commissions called her an
officer and gentleman until she made major.

She confused the system in general -- WWII Chief Aviation Metalsmith
running the airframe maintenance school at Pensacola, went to school on
the GI bill where they wouldn't let her enroll to teach shop, so she
would up with a master's in social work.

She remained an inactive Navy reservist throughout her education, and
somebody marked it down somewhere. When the Korean War broke out, she
tended not to think they needed a lot of airframe people.

They didn't. They needed, however, mental health professionals. She
wasn't just activated as an individual, but was involuntarily
direct-commissioned as 1LT, USAR, and sent off to a hospital in
Heidelberg.

I've never run across this before or since. Drove the personnel people
absolutely nuts.

Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2004 10:59:43 -0400, "George Z. Bush"
wrote:

Ed Rasimus wrote:
On 27 May 2004 11:13:38 GMT, (WalterM140) wrote:

Ed:

Trust me, I care very much about the folks in uniform.

Then act like it.

Walt

Tsk. Tsk. You lose the high ground when you lose your temper. He's
entitled to disagree with you, as you are with him, but there's no need for
anyone to be disagreeable about it. Let's keep the discussion on a civil
plane, please.

I don't lose my temper, however I also have a deep reluctance to
suffer fools, gladly or not.

I believe you introduced a four letter expletive that starts with the letter "F"
into the exchange. Since I don't recall it being in response to similar
language from Walt, I'm sure you'll forgive me for thinking that you had gotten
a tad ****ed off to the point of sort of losing it. If not, then you sure as
hell fooled me.

.....Until someone offers credentials, I won't
be told whether or not I value our troops nor how to act.

Since I'm not the one who started the discussion, I'm going to stay out of it
and let Walt deal with that.

BTW, your comment on the French was ill advised, IMHO. They were exposed to
Islamic terrorism long before we were when Algeria blew up in their faces
after WWII. It might benefit us to try to learn something from their
experiences with it instead of trying to put them down because they refuse
to dance to our tune. In addition, their current contributions to our
efforts against terrorism in Afghanistan is somewhat larger than many of
those of our vaunted coalition allies in Iraq. They deserve somewhat better
than the condescension with which you deal with them. But that's just my
opinion, and I hope you will allow me that without tearing me a new asshole
for daring to make that point.

It wasn't condescension, it was merely statement of fact.

C'mon, Ed, be honest....it was a deliberate put down and you know it. In the
early part of our engagement in Afghanistan, the French sent a carrier to the
Middle East and committed their entire air complement to our initial efforts
against AQ and the Taliban. I don't know how long they stayed and took part in
the operation, but we didn't tell them to go home and take their dolls and
dishes with them. From what I understand, they still have some of their
equivalent of our special forces committed in Afghanistan as we speak, although
I must admit that I have no idea of how many troops we're talking about.

.....There is hardly a nation in the world that hasn't suffered terrorism in
one
form or another--much of it isn't muslim extremist. But, it is
difficult to deny the fact that failure to respond to terrorism
doesn't offer much in the way of results.

I don't recall that I made that suggestion, so refuting it to me is sort of
wasted effort.

.....To abjectly declare that we are somehow responsible for it and that if we
simply
understand their pain, join hands and sing Kumbaya together it will all go
away is
foolishness of the highest order.

Again, I'm not the one who may have suggested that we are somehow responsible
for the terrorism inflicted on us so I don't understand why you felt obliged to
direct that remark to me. IAC, your use of the "Kumbaya" crack was clearly
racist if unintended, and I thought somewhat beneath you. You surely know
perfectly well that "Kumbaya" is a black South African folk song and introducing
it into the discussion didn't seem warranted to me.

Simply declining to participate would have been a choice available to
the French, however undermining our diplomatic efforts, duplicity in
the UN and a clear economic linkage to the Saddam regime have combined
to make the French involvement in the Iraq question less than
reasonable behavior.

Is there some way for the French to say "no" to our efforts to get them and the
rest of the UN to participate with us other than saying "no"? Maybe, if we
didn't want them to run their chops, we'd have been better advised to stop
pushing them to sign on. French political leaders, too, have a public that they
have to justify their actions to, as we do and, as I recall, their public was
not in favor of them joining in with us at the time.

As for any rending, tearing or surgical rearrangement of your
posterior, I will refrain since you have demonstrated your bona fides
on numerous occasions. While we disagree on some issues, the
discussion is on the issue itself and not what you should or should
not be doing in regard to a particular sense of values.

No argument there, Ed.

George Z.

.....To abjectly declare that we are somehow responsible for it and that if
we
simply
understand their pain, join hands and sing Kumbaya together it will all go
away is
foolishness of the highest order.

Again, I'm not the one who may have suggested that we are somehow responsible
for the terrorism inflicted on us so I don't understand why you felt obliged
to
direct that remark to me. IAC, your use of the "Kumbaya" crack was clearly
racist if unintended, and I thought somewhat beneath you. You surely know
perfectly well that "Kumbaya" is a black South African folk song and
introducing
it into the discussion didn't seem warranted to me

I think you are grossly misinterpreting this "Kumbaya" statement. Most
wouldnt know it is a south african folk song, I sure didnt. It was probably
more illustrative of those peace activist types who have a mindset that we
really can all just get along with terrorists if we are nice to them/peace at
any cost/lets dont make the terrorists mad at us even more.

Its rather silly to call what he said racist, since he was not injecting race
into it in any manner.

Ron
Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4)
Silver City Tanker Base

George came out with:
IAC, your use of the "Kumbaya" crack was clearly
racist if unintended, and I thought somewhat beneath you. You surely know
perfectly well that "Kumbaya" is a black South African folk song and
introducing

Come on George, "Kumbaya" was learned by more people in the US as a church camp
or peace activist song. Most of us learned it without the racial intent that
you propose. Southern Baptist or Methodist church camps in the 50's would not
allow a black song. I doubt that Ed learned it in a peace demonstration either,
unless he was the guy in back wearing a mask and wig.

Oxmoron1
MFE

Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: Howard Berkowitz
Date: 5/27/04 9:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: Ed Rasimus

On 27 May 2004 11:13:38 GMT, (WalterM140) wrote:

Now, all that being said, just who the **** are you to tell me how to
act?


Now Ed, be nice. Remember you are an officer and a gentleman. (grin)


That used to confuse the Army. My mother's commissions called her an
officer and gentleman until she made major.

She confused the system in general -- WWII Chief Aviation Metalsmith
running the airframe maintenance school at Pensacola, went to school on
the GI bill where they wouldn't let her enroll to teach shop, so she
would up with a master's in social work.

She remained an inactive Navy reservist throughout her education, and
somebody marked it down somewhere. When the Korean War broke out, she
tended not to think they needed a lot of airframe people.

They didn't. They needed, however, mental health professionals. She
wasn't just activated as an individual, but was involuntarily
direct-commissioned as 1LT, USAR, and sent off to a hospital in
Heidelberg.

I've never run across this before or since. Drove the personnel people
absolutely nuts.


She is indeed an officer and a gentleman.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Ed Rasimus wrote:

Trust me. I teach political science at the local college. I teach
international relations as part of the job. I maintain an active
interest in the role of the military. I am not particularly prone to
emotionalism and I like to couch my political discourse in objective
analysis...

You may like this link to a most scholarly and unbiased
analysis of US policy, where the various citizen viewpoints came from,
how they contrast to European policy (and why), the Constitutional
aspect of it, pragmatism, idealism, neoconservatism (what it's
intended to mean, what it actually represents and why), liberalism
(what it used to mean and what it means today), conspiracy theories,
and all the rest.

It's about the most interesting thing politically that I have
read in ten years. Well thought out, unslanted, and guaranteed to make
you think, no matter what side your views are on.

Sorry about the formatting, it's just quickie HTML.

http://jshinal.tripod.com/analysis_21c_USPolicy.html




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: (John S. Shinal)
Date: 5/27/04 12:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

Ed Rasimus wrote:

Trust me. I teach political science at the local college. I teach
international relations as part of the job. I maintain an active
interest in the role of the military. I am not particularly prone to
emotionalism and I like to couch my political discourse in objective
analysis...

You may like this link to a most scholarly and unbiased
analysis of US policy, where the various citizen viewpoints came from,
how they contrast to European policy (and why), the Constitutional
aspect of it, pragmatism, idealism, neoconservatism (what it's
intended to mean, what it actually represents and why), liberalism
(what it used to mean and what it means today), conspiracy theories,
and all the rest.

It's about the most interesting thing politically that I have
read in ten years. Well thought out, unslanted, and guaranteed to make
you think, no matter what side your views are on.


And le'ts not overlook Wagnleiter's "The Foreign Politics of American Popular
Culture"
..
Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"Ron" wrote in message
...
.....To abjectly declare that we are somehow responsible for it and that if
we
simply
understand their pain, join hands and sing Kumbaya together it will all go
away is
foolishness of the highest order.

Again, I'm not the one who may have suggested that we are somehow responsible
for the terrorism inflicted on us so I don't understand why you felt obliged
to
direct that remark to me. IAC, your use of the "Kumbaya" crack was clearly
racist if unintended, and I thought somewhat beneath you. You surely know
perfectly well that "Kumbaya" is a black South African folk song and
introducing
it into the discussion didn't seem warranted to me

I think you are grossly misinterpreting this "Kumbaya" statement. Most
wouldnt know it is a south african folk song, I sure didnt. It was probably
more illustrative of those peace activist types who have a mindset that we
really can all just get along with terrorists if we are nice to them/peace at
any cost/lets dont make the terrorists mad at us even more.

Its rather silly to call what he said racist, since he was not injecting race
into it in any manner.

Point taken. Thanks.

George Z.

On Thu, 27 May 2004 19:54:48 GMT,
(John S. Shinal) wrote:

You may like this link to a most scholarly and unbiased
analysis of US policy, where the various citizen viewpoints came from,
how they contrast to European policy (and why), the Constitutional
aspect of it, pragmatism, idealism, neoconservatism (what it's
intended to mean, what it actually represents and why), liberalism
(what it used to mean and what it means today), conspiracy theories,
and all the rest.

It's about the most interesting thing politically that I have
read in ten years. Well thought out, unslanted, and guaranteed to make
you think, no matter what side your views are on.

Sorry about the formatting, it's just quickie HTML.

http://jshinal.tripod.com/analysis_21c_USPolicy.html

That is, indeed, an excellent overview of US foreign policy. It
condenses the entire introductory course of International Relations
down into a single readable newspaper article. The insights into
America's world view are little short of profound.

I would only note, however, that when applied to international
relations, the terms liberal and conservative take on a different
meaning than they do when applied to the American political parties
and their respective ideological positions.

In IR, the term "liberal" is usually applied to a moralistic view of
the interactions between nations. It is the view that nations are
"moral" players and there are good guys and bad guys. We, the US,
usually like to consider ourselves as the good guys.

The term "conservative" in IR is the more modern "realpolitik" view
that nations act strictly to serve their national self-interest and
they are essentially amoral. Machiavellian, if you will.

Clearly the shift (a fairly minor one according to the article) of the
Bush administration is to the moralist view--arguably Wilsonian, and
away from the Morganthau/Kissinger realpolitik self-interest
perspective. Strangely enough, in IR terms, that makes Bush a liberal!



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

"OXMORON1" wrote in message
...
George came out with:
IAC, your use of the "Kumbaya" crack was clearly
racist if unintended, and I thought somewhat beneath you. You surely know
perfectly well that "Kumbaya" is a black South African folk song and
introducing

Come on George, "Kumbaya" was learned by more people in the US as a church
camp
or peace activist song. Most of us learned it without the racial intent that
you propose. Southern Baptist or Methodist church camps in the 50's would not
allow a black song. I doubt that Ed learned it in a peace demonstration
either,
unless he was the guy in back wearing a mask and wig.

I see your point. I was looking at it from my own vantage point, having first
heard it at a time when apartheid was alive and well in South Africa and when it
represented their black citizens who were struggling for some measure of
equality there at the time. When it was originally introduced into our country,
it was a sort of anthem of South Africa's black "freedom fighters", hence my
equating it with racism. It was not a song of peaceniks at that time.

However, as I said, I see your point and concede that Ed may have used it in the
same context you did.

George Z.

Oxmoron1
MFE