MichFan Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 From what I saw, didn't watch all of it-Kerry either did not pay any attention at the National Security briefings he (grudgingly) received, or he planned all along to out and out lie. Kerryites? I'm sorry, but that's what your boy did. And in some areas there isn't going to be much Bush can do about it. I'd be pi$sed too. And if you let this guy become in charge of our security, we're screwed. I had this feeling watching the debates last night that Bush is used to carrying out debate and discussion on a beach of classified knowledge but last night he was constrained to the sand box of what has been disclosed to the public. I took his grimaces as being out of disgust over Kerry saying the things he was saying for political advantage when Bush knew Kerry has been briefed on the big picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I had this feeling watching the debates last night that Bush is used to carrying out debate and discussion on a beach of classified knowledge but last night he was constrained to the sand box of what has been disclosed to the public. I took his grimaces as being out of disgust over Kerry saying the things he was saying for political advantage when Bush knew Kerry has been briefed on the big picture. 52421[/snapback] That's EXACTLY how I saw it. Someone should tell McCauliffe he's on a wild goose chase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichFan Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 That's EXACTLY how I saw it. Someone should tell McCauliffe he's on a wild goose chase. If this actually is the case, the question then becomes -- is Bush willing to declassify the information needed to show Kerry is being disingenuine in his efforts to win the presidency? I'd rather expose a little sensitive information to keep Bush in office than have Kerry win in a farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 If this actually is the case, the question then becomes -- is Bush willing to declassify the information needed to show Kerry is being disingenuine in his efforts to win the presidency? I'd rather expose a little sensitive information to keep Bush in office than have Kerry win in a farce. 52430[/snapback] Answer to that is no: Bush is willing to kill his own political career in the interests of national security. That's not first-hand info on my part...but I have heard it from multiple, reliable people independent of each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 If this actually is the case, the question then becomes -- is Bush willing to declassify the information needed to show Kerry is being disingenuine in his efforts to win the presidency? I'd rather expose a little sensitive information to keep Bush in office than have Kerry win in a farce. 52430[/snapback] As far as these issues go, there's plenty of unclassified stuff they can use-they just need to get it out there. Example: The PSI-proliferation security initiative. Bush has organized the largest, functioning WMD non-proliferation coalition in history. Countries like France, Spain, Russia, Germany and about 70 others actively perform interdictions and shut down networks. The global GWOT effort is operated much the same way. The actual GWOT plans are TS, which is why you never hear much about it. 90% of the operations are very, very black. Kerry's tripe about Russian nuclear material is pure crap. I work in the agency that is the executive agent for Russian nuclear stockpile and material stuff. We have folks scurrying around Russia like ants, for crying out loud. They just need to get the info out, but sadly-it might take more than three sentences so people won't read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 As far as these issues go, there's plenty of unclassified stuff they can use-they just need to get it out there. Example: The PSI-proliferation security initiative. Bush has organized the largest, functioning WMD non-proliferation coalition in history. Countries like France, Spain, Russia, Germany and about 70 others actively perform interdictions and shut down networks. The global GWOT effort is operated much the same way. The actual GWOT plans are TS, which is why you never hear much about it. 90% of the operations are very, very black. Kerry's tripe about Russian nuclear material is pure crap. I work in the agency that is the executive agent for Russian nuclear stockpile and material stuff. We have folks scurrying around Russia like ants, for crying out loud. They just need to get the info out, but sadly-it might take more than three sentences so people won't read it. 52450[/snapback] Which gets back to what I've been saying for quite a while...this administration's biggest problem is that they have absolutely no !@#$ing idea how to market what they're actually doing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Which gets back to what I've been saying for quite a while...this administration's biggest problem is that they have absolutely no !@#$ing idea how to market what they're actually doing... 52466[/snapback] Once again, as much as everyone wants to call Bush an idiot, this is some complicated stuff. Real, real hard to get a big picture across to the voters when some of the individual pieces don't "look" right. Case in point, the role of OIF in the overall GWOT. That's been debated here to death-it's been pretty well fully explained-and 99% of everyone here is still at square one of the argument. More fire trucks? Puhleeze. What needs to get talked about is the national support structure, done through FEMA, for a catastrophic event. If you try to ramp up the entire country to respond to a catastrophic event, you'll have BILLIONS of dollars in people and equipment not getting used, hopefully 100% of the time. The fight against terror is away from our shores as much as possible. Responding to a successful attack is planned for. But, how does that all sound to the voter? He hears "Bush isn't giving us more firetrucks-Bush Bad". You tell the average American voter how a systematic regionalized augmentation, including specialized assets from within the DoD are already sourced and programmed to respond to an incident anywhere within the United States, and you'll get the where are my cookies look. I'll bet you dollars to donuts right now, that there are Kerryites who will read this and think "But we don't have enough fire trucks and Bush is leaving nookaler material out so the terrorists can have it." Where's the hit in the head with a hammer smiley? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichFan Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Which gets back to what I've been saying for quite a while...this administration's biggest problem is that they have absolutely no !@#$ing idea how to market what they're actually doing... I think this has to do with the way Bush operates. He has hand picked people he has great confidence in and empowered them to do their best. As such, he is a big picture guy who trusts his staff when it comes to the details. Kerry can debate the minutia because that is inherent to the way he operates as a Senator. Bush can't because it's the opposite to how he operates as a president. On a day when he should have been focusing on talking points for the debate, he was visiting hurricane victims. In an earlier reply you stated he would be willing to lose for the sake of protecting sensitive intelligence. I strongly admire him for things like this, but this guy's compassion and respect for the office are going to cost him an election if he doesn't watch out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Funny how these threads always die when some facts get inserted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Once again, as much as everyone wants to call Bush an idiot, this is some complicated stuff. Real, real hard to get a big picture across to the voters when some of the individual pieces don't "look" right. Case in point, the role of OIF in the overall GWOT. That's been debated here to death-it's been pretty well fully explained-and 99% of everyone here is still at square one of the argument. More fire trucks? Puhleeze. What needs to get talked about is the national support structure, done through FEMA, for a catastrophic event. If you try to ramp up the entire country to respond to a catastrophic event, you'll have BILLIONS of dollars in people and equipment not getting used, hopefully 100% of the time. The fight against terror is away from our shores as much as possible. Responding to a successful attack is planned for. But, how does that all sound to the voter? He hears "Bush isn't giving us more firetrucks-Bush Bad". You tell the average American voter how a systematic regionalized augmentation, including specialized assets from within the DoD are already sourced and programmed to respond to an incident anywhere within the United States, and you'll get the where are my cookies look. I'll bet you dollars to donuts right now, that there are Kerryites who will read this and think "But we don't have enough fire trucks and Bush is leaving nookaler material out so the terrorists can have it." Where's the hit in the head with a hammer smiley? 52485[/snapback] I'm not saying otherwise. My point's merely that: 1) Politics is inherently grounded in marketing, even if national security isn't, and 2) Proper marketing campaigns necessarily explain complex things. Regardless of the effectiveness or complexity of the national security issues, this administration's marketing of its efforts in regards to such frankly sucks, right back to the Iraq war justifications. Hell, even senior administration officials have admitted off the record that however justified the war was they were simply doing a piss-poor job of selling it, and subsequently left the administration because of it. You know I'm more informed on these matters than your average Joe. I got that way by working hard for two years, keeping an ear to the ground and trying to piece together discontinuous tidbits of info from different people into a coherent picture of what's going on, and largely ignoring official administration statements. What do you think the average Joe's going to think when they spend ten seconds contemplating a fifteen word administration sound byte? This administration seriously needs to hire a Madison Avenue exec to teach them how to present their positions to the American public... And that's why the die-hard "Vote Kerry, he's not Bush!" will B word and moan about fire trucks. Kerry's got better marketing. Hell, if proper marketing can convince people that inhaling tar, carbon monoxide, and carcinogens is a good idea, it can certainly convince them that the WMDs that didn't exist in Iraq are just laying around for the terrorists' taking because of Bush's inability to secure them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I think this has to do with the way Bush operates. He has hand picked people he has great confidence in and empowered them to do their best. As such, he is a big picture guy who trusts his staff when it comes to the details. Kerry can debate the minutia because that is inherent to the way he operates as a Senator. Bush can't because it's the opposite to how he operates as a president. On a day when he should have been focusing on talking points for the debate, he was visiting hurricane victims. In an earlier reply you stated he would be willing to lose for the sake of protecting sensitive intelligence. I strongly admire him for things like this, but this guy's compassion and respect for the office are going to cost him an election if he doesn't watch out. 52488[/snapback] I remember someone else said that the other day here... ...oh yeah, it was me. Thanks for stealing my material. (Kidding...my post was a 500-word run-on sentence. Doubt anyone read it. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 I remember someone else said that the other day here... ...oh yeah, it was me. Thanks for stealing my material. (Kidding...my post was a 500-word run-on sentence. Doubt anyone read it. ) 52597[/snapback] DC, I didn't read this thread, but your "heads up" about anti-missile assets steaming into the NK theater was confirmed today in the popular press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 DC, I didn't read this thread, but your "heads up" about anti-missile assets steaming into the NK theater was confirmed today in the popular press. 52601[/snapback] I'd be amazed it took so long to be reported...if I weren't so amazed they reported it at all. That news is weeks old. Wonder now if they'll catch the story about the Navy asking Sweden to lease them a submarine - a conventional diesel-electric submarine suited for coastal defense - for training up the Pacific Fleet in littoral anti-submarine warfare. Hmmm, let's see...conventional sub threat, littoral warfare training, Pacific Fleet...gee, they must be worried about Sinagpore! Don't you wish they'd stop wasting their time on nonsense like that, and start dealing with North Korea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts