The CIA has to many functions outside its mission statement. It was suppose to be a clearing house for the various Defense, Domestic,
and Diplomatic intelligent services. The CIA has "poached" and interfered with other intelligent services to the net lost of intelligence gathered.
> If I rememebr correctly, one vote was cast against more technology development because Kerry honestly believed that having more spies
Most of the technology areas such as communications is the NSA's area.
> on the ground mixed in with the bad guys was the most effective way to go, at least until technology became so good that it could do 100% > of what spies now do.
Well its true, especially if you're spying on a low tech threat (see vietnam). Satellites can not see under bridges or in warehouses.
I don't remember ever starting a political thread. So, this is my turn.
Just saw Powell at ABC, This Week, talking about the Iraqi War. The word shame is nowhere in his lexicon. At least when Bush or Cheney lie, we see discomfort in their eyes and tone of voice, not this man. He can beat polygraph machine every time.
How fooled I feel, when I voted for Bush, and had the highest praise for this man ...
As President Bush said:
"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says: 'Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."
I want to end this by the following from Anna Quindlen/Newsweek: April 21,2003
"A lesson in American history: each time the United States becomes imperial, it betrays the very keystone upon which its greatness rests"
I am sure this is going way over the head of the pseudo right wing nuts on this board. True conservatives and patriots in the U.S. knew better than support the policies of Cheney & Associates.
I was watching the McLaughlin Group while waiting in an airport recently. The forum had several conservatives, including Pat Buchanan and several liberals. An interesting point came up about John Kerry's vote against more funding for the CIA. He had two votes on the issue. If I rememebr correctly, one vote was cast against more technology development because Kerry honestly believed that having more spies on the ground mixed in with the bad guys was the most effective way to go, at least until technology became so good that it could do 100% of what spies now do. The second vote was aginst some CIA funding that was to be used for purposes totally unrelated to the CIA's mission. When you listen to campaign information from his opponents, you would think that Kerry is unpatriotic and is determined to weaken the CIA and defense. How can any person who studies records in an unpassioned manner arrive at such a conclusion? Kerry fought in a war for his country, he later had mis-givings about the conduct of that war, but not about his service.
One can only wonder what the US would be like now if the CIA had focused on getting more spies embedded in Osama Bin Laden's outer and inner circles before September 11, 2001 or had focused on getting more working spies on the ground in Iraq before we went to war. Hindsight is 20/20 but one can reasonably conclude that Kerry, at the time of his votes, was right about the need for more spies on the ground versus unproven technology and on keeping the CIA focused on it's main mission.
I am probaly one of the few political moderates in this forum and have wanted this forum to stay with it's main objective. I have not made up my mind on who to vote for and will listen to all information on candidates and their positions before making my decision. I just hope that I do not have to wade through more bending of the truth.
The CIA has to many functions outside its mission statement. It was suppose to be a clearing house for the various Defense, Domestic,
and Diplomatic intelligent services. The CIA has "poached" and interfered with other intelligent services to the net lost of intelligence gathered.
> If I rememebr correctly, one vote was cast against more technology development because Kerry honestly believed that having more spies
Most of the technology areas such as communications is the NSA's area.
> on the ground mixed in with the bad guys was the most effective way to go, at least until technology became so good that it could do 100% > of what spies now do.
Well its true, especially if you're spying on a low tech threat (see vietnam). Satellites can not see under bridges or in warehouses.
I am probably one of the more right-winged of the right-wing nuts on the board -- I would rather see the board less involved in politics (outside of hobbying). I would rather see this as a self-enforced rule by the members -- not as a rule enforced by the moderators.
I see a lot of bile come out of these debates -- not much else.
-Hoot.