MyDD :: It is the SECURITY...Stupid

It is the SECURITY...Stupid

by Parker, Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 03:41:29 AM EST

Where the hell are all of our "Security Dems" and left-wing "Military Hawks"?

There is only one TRUTH in this whole fiasco:

Republicans can not Keep America safe

The GOP won the 2004 presidency and the swept the COngress on the fact that they were "trigger-happy"... it is a shame that their bluster has no relevance to actual threats to the US and Americans... but only to the vested interest ie Oil

Katrina shows clearly, that this adminstration has absolutly NO INTENTION on keeping Americans safe...

Even the most ardent GOPer fluffers like Brooks and Russert can see that... why aren't the "Security Democrats" and the left-wing "military Hawks" talking about American Security???

"Batman" aka Al From and his "Robin" aka Simon Rosenberg are trying to promote any candidate that has worn a uniform since WWII...(even Republicans ie Massa). Why are they not telling the truth that:

Trigger-Happiness...does NOT equal a National Security Plan.

This is even evident to all the "Security Moms", and wingnuts who voted for Bush because 9/11 scared the shit out of them and they wanted a "Bad Motherfucker" in charge who wasn't bashful about going "Mid-evil" on some terrorists ass...

LIEberman was outraged when Dean called DHS on the use of "Security Alerts" as political... and they were.

Thousands of people have died this past week (some estimate say 10 time the amount of 9/11), 1.5 million were made homeless and a landmass the size of Great Britain (or the size of a nuclear attack) lay in ruins and the "Security Alert" never moved up from YELLOW... so what does that tell you. This adminstration has no clue on how to keep Americans safe... and really could not give a shit as illustrated in their actions on the first three days of this catatrophe.

What was the "National Security" response... "Shoot at it" and kill the story

It is the SECURITY...Stupid

Tags: (all tags)

Permalink :: 7 Comments :: Post a Comment

You finally figured it out? (none / 0)

Parker-
I know you're a bit thick- but have you ever heard of environmental security?

You might not believe it, but the military and the actual national security thinkers have been sounding the alarm over this for YEARS.

You are correct, finally.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 10:32:21 PM EST

Zinni (none / 0)

Since you seem to have awoken from your slumber Parker, I invite you to revisit some of the things that national security thinkers and professionals were talking about security. For example, take a look at this speech by Anthony Zinni from 2003:

I was asked right after retirement, by NDU [National Defense University], what I thought the future missions would be for our military, and the capabilities they should possess. And I gave them seven things, back in 2000, that I thought were important. The first was the ability to defeat a global power with sophisticated military capabilities. That always will be the priority for our military. If there is another emergent threat on a global scale, if there is somebody out there that's a so-called peer competitor that we have to deal with, that's always going to be the number-one way we design, organize, procure what we need to fight.
...
The second I said was to deal with regional hegemonies with asymmetric capabilities, such as weapons of mass destruction, missiles-with basically a design to deny us access to vital areas of the world and regional allies in places where we care. The third was to deal with transnational threats that included terrorist groups, international crime and drug organizations, warlords, environmental security issues, health and disease problems, and illegal migrations.

The fourth was to deal with the problems of failed or incapable states that require peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, or national reconstruction.

Notice that by a security stand point the US is currently a failed or failing state.

The needed to deal with overseas crises that popped up, and respond to them quickly, where our U.S. citizens and property were in danger. And we needed to be capable of dealing with domestic emergencies that exceeded the capacity of other federal and local government agencies. And finally, we had to protect against threats to our key repositories of information and our systems for moving information.

Hmmm. That damned "Republican" Zinni with all his sense making!

He goes on:

We saw these as the missions for our military in the 21st century. And, in fact, that was the title of the paper and the title of the speech. And I think they still hold. This wasn't any remarkable prescience on my part; you could have asked [retired Marine Corps General] Charlie Wilhelm, [former Pacific Commander-in-Chief Admiral] Denny Blair. You could have asked [former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General] Wes Clark, any of the CINCs [commanders-in-chief] at the time. You would have come up with the same list. You could have asked anybody that's looking at the world or global threats that we faced out there, and you would have gotten the same answer. You could have asked anybody in our intelligence community what they foresaw as the requirement, you would have gotten the same answer. So there was nothing remarkable about this.

"Usually we look at the other elements of national power-the political, the economic, information, whatever-that are going to be brought to bear. . . . That has not happened."
What is remarkable about it is the military's role. The military traditionally is supposed to go out there and kill people and break things. And then from that, we determine how we're going to right the disorder or fix the conflict. Usually we look at the other elements of national power-the political, the economic, information, whatever-that are going to be brought to bear, much like George Marshall saw it at the end of the Second World War. That has not happened.

The military does a damn good job of killing people and breaking things. And we can sit here and design a better rifle squad, build a better fighter, a better ship, a better tank. And we're so far ahead of any potential enemy right now in those kinds of technological areas, in the areas of expertise of quality of leadership, and all the things that make military units great on the battlefield, that you wonder why we keep busting brain cells wondering how to continually do it better, or to transform into something else. I'm for transformation, if you define it as finding better remarkable ways to tap into technology, into our own brain power, into our training and education, creative ways of redesigning our organization to make our military even more efficient, more powerful on the battlefield. But that is not the problem and it hasn't been.

What is the role of the military beyond that point? Right now the military in Iraq has been stuck with this baby. In Somalia it was stuck with that baby. In Vietnam it was stuck with that baby. And it's going to continue to be that way. And what we have to ask ourselves now is, is there something that the military needs to change into that involves its movement into this area of the political, the economic, the information management? If the others, those wearing suits, can't come in and solve the problem-can't bring the resources, the expertise, and the organization-and we're going to continue to get stuck with it, you have one or two choices. Either they get the capability and it's demanded of them, and we learn how to partner to get it done, or the military finally decides to change into something else beyond the breaking and the killing.

You know, it's a damned shame that it takes catostrophic, mass casualty, events to wake people up to the insecurity they face under our current anarchist government, but fuck it. Go read the whole speach Parker, and tell me that you can't see why not only is it security, stupid, but Anthony Zinni is the man to deliver that message and to help to right the fucked up and destructive course these anti-government madmen have put us on.

I tell you one thing though, it's time to shelve the f-cking attitude... ;-) That and Wes Clark for President!

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Wed Sep 07, 2005 at 11:01:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Zinni (none / 0)

Make your own diary... damning me wit faint praise...is pathetic..

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Thu Sep 08, 2005 at 04:57:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Zinni (none / 0)

So in other words, you don't really want to get it. You just want to vent... as usual.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Thu Sep 08, 2005 at 07:09:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You finally figured it out? (none / 0)

I am prefacing my cussing because you are insulting me.

You piece of shit... if you don't like my fucking diaries then go jerk off someplace else... jackass.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Thu Sep 08, 2005 at 04:56:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You finally figured it out? (none / 0)

I'll assume that's meant to be funny... not that I mind the cussing.

I'm a jackass because...

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Thu Sep 08, 2005 at 07:07:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Arianna steals my diary (none / 0)

yes I am flattered...

Ariana:

Will the Dems Ever Learn? "It's The National Security, Stupid"

Did the Dems learn nothing from 2004? Bush won because he had a double-digit lead on the question of who was going to keep us safer.
So how come the Democrats are not making the "We will protect you better" case?
The debacle in New Orleans contains all the elements necessary to show how Bush's misguided priorities -- especially his obsession with Iraq -- have left us far more vulnerable, unsafe, and insecure. It's the perfect opportunity to redefine national security in a way that would ironically -- by putting America first -- most appeal to the red states.

Me:

It is the SECURITY...Stupid

The GOP won the 2004 presidency and the swept the Congress on the fact that they were "trigger-happy"... because 9/11 scared the shit out of them and they wanted a "Bad Motherfucker" in charge who wasn't bashful about going "Mid-evil" on some terrorists ass...
Where the hell are all of our "Security Dems" and left-wing "Military Hawks"?
Thousands of people have died this past week (some estimate say 10 time the amount of 9/11), 1.5 million were made homeless and a landmass the size of Great Britain (or the size of a nuclear attack) lay in ruins and the "Security Alert" never moved up from YELLOW... so what does that tell you. This adminstration has no clue on how to keep Americans safe...

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Thu Sep 08, 2005 at 10:35:56 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.