The art of the deal

 

Bits and bobs...

Sarcastic responses to signs.

What a president Al Gore would have made....

Air Force Cites New Testament, Ex-Nazi, to Train Officers on Ethics of Launching Nuclear Weapons

Permaculture...

..a simple system for designing sustainable human settlements, restoring soil, planting year-round food landscapes, conserving water, redirecting the waste stream, forming more companionable communities...

No photoshopping? How will beauty product corporations keep women buying crap to do the impossible?

Dead boars and green toxic algae

Doing more for world safety and stability

In one diplomatic act than Bush and Cheney did with seven years of bombing:

MOSCOW — President Obama signed an agreement on Monday to cut American and Russian strategic nuclear arsenals by at least one-quarter, a first step in a broader effort intended to reduce the threat of such weapons drastically and to prevent their further spread to unstable regions.

And he didn't even have to peer into Putin's soul...

What the heck, we're in the neighborhood already

A third war won't kill us, right?:

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon's top military officer says he's comfortable that Pakistan's nuclear weapons remain secure, but is gravely concerned about Taliban advances there and in Afghanistan.

He says the United States has worked with the Pakistanis to improve the security of their nuclear arsenal and he believes that country's military is focused on keeping them secure.

He also said Monday the worst-case scenario is that Pakistan's weapons would fall into the hands of terrorists. But he said he doesn't think that's going to happen.

Mullen spoke at a Pentagon news conference on his recent trip to the region.

Right. We're relying on the Pakistani military to protect the nuclear weapons? This military?:

Pakistan's army: as inept as it is corrupt

The answer to why Pakistan's mighty army seems impotent against Taliban insurgents is that it is more mafia than military

I have a bad feeling about this....

Update: We should have been dealing with this problem years ago, but instead the Bush administration just threw money at it.

Pakistan's peace pact with the Taliban is close to collapse, a Taliban spokesman has warned, accusing the government and the army of being stooges for the US.

The warning came as Pakistani troops continued their offensive against Taliban fighters in Buner in the country's northwest on Monday, killing seven fighters.

The fighting has strained the government's deal with the Taliban that allows for the enforcement of sharia, or Islamic law, across Malakand division in exchange for peace.

"They [the army and government] have no respect for any pact," Muslim Khan, the Pakistani Taliban's spokesman in neighbouring Swat, said.

"They keep violating every agreement and if this goes on, definitely there will be no deal, no ceasefire.

"This is not our army, this is not our government. They're worse enemies of Muslims than the Americans. They're US stooges and now it's clear that either we'll be martyred or we'll march forward."

Just goes to show you when you had a stooge who became preznit, the entire government reflected his leadership....



crossposted at American Street

Now they tell us...

British intel is complaining they were dragged into Bush's war:

Britain was "dragged into a war in Iraq which was always against out better judgment" the former deputy head of MI6 has claimed, in a remark that will reignite the debate over political interference in the war.

Sad to admit it, but thank God Edwards did not become president. We'd be neck deep in the meaning of 'is':

RALEIGH, N.C. – Failed presidential candidate John Edwards, whose political action committee paid more than $100,000 to his mistress' company, acknowledged Sunday that federal investigators were looking into how he handled his campaign funds.

But the former North Carolina senator said he was confident no money was used improperly.

The Hummer is a shitty car? Who knew?:

We also found huge differences between the best and worst values. The Hummer H2, for example, is a terrible deal, with a bucks-per-bang figure of $3,620 because of a high five-year owner cost of about $82,250 and a low test score of only 23.

Pakistan is still building more nuclear weapon sites?:

WASHINGTON — Pakistan is expanding its nuclear weapons program even as Islamic extremists in northwest Pakistan advance in the direction of several highly sensitive nuclear-related sites, U.S. officials and other experts said this week.

Norman Podhoretz is a boob.

Who still insists that we must bomb Iran. Now. Quickly. Before Bush leaves office. Because Iran may achieve a nuke in 2015. And is thinking about nukes. And talking about them. Which in Podhoretz' mind is a bombing offense:

Iran won't have a nuclear weapon until 2015, according to the spooks. This, of course, Podhoretz takes in his stride. Tearing the (classified) 2005 NIE to shreds, he reminds us again that the spooks are more likely wrong than right, and the US must bomb Iran NOW before it's too late: "[O]nly by relying on the accuracy of the 2005 NIE would Mr Bush be able in all good conscience to pass on to his successor the decision of whether or when to bomb the Iranian nuclear facilities. But that estimate, as he could hardly help knowing from the CIA's not exactly brilliant track record, might easily be too optimistic."

But now it's our turn to say "Hold on!" Norman, may we remind you of your introductory sentence? In case you had forgotten, it says: "Up until a fairly short time ago, scarcely anyone dissented from the assessment offered with 'high confidence' by the National Intelligence Estimate of 2005 that Iran was 'determined to develop nuclear weapons'." Yet now you are telling us that like the 2007 NIE, the 2005 NIE is not worth the paper it's written on? So where exactly do you find the evidence to back your unwavering assertions that Iran is on the brink of developing a nuke? In Vice President Dick Cheney's office? Dang, Norman, it really is time to consider a mental silicone implant.

The funny thing is, to the best of our knowledge (including exhaustive web searches) the actual contents of the classified 2005 NIE remain unknown to anyone outside the intelligence establishment or their masters (and clearly, Podhoretz is not a member of the intelligence community).

It was not until the 2007 NIE findings were released that we discovered that the 2005 NIE allegedly assessed "with high confidence that Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons". The 2007 NIE lays out for us exactly how its findings differ from those of 2005, all neatly tabulated and in your face (see the public version of the NIE here ). How does Podhoretz know what the 2005 assessment (with which "scarcely anyone dissented") said, without getting the information from the 2007 NIE that he has so thoroughly discredited?

Actually, there is only one question arising from this tangled web of NIEs, and it's not whether Iran should or should not be bombed, or whether Podhoretz needs hormone therapy, or why people read garbage like his article. The question is, why did the authors of the 2007 NIE see fit to publicly flaunt the (allegedly) inaccurate and previously unknown findings of the 2005 NIE? Could it have been intended as a message to people like Podhoretz's neo-con dog handlers to butt out this time around?

We think that's quite possible: the 2007 key findings were released to the public hard on the heels of reports that the NIE had been delayed for months because of pressure from Cheney's office to make it more congenial to aggressive military action against Iran (see Spooks refuse to toe Cheney's line on Iran, November 10, 2007).

Um.. Could we just speed up the process and bomb Iran with Norman Podhoretz?

We'll talk to you after you've done everything we demand of you

And then there'll be nothing to talk about:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday the United States remains open to negotiations with Iran and Syria if both these countries change what she characterized as confrontational policies in the Middle East.
Iran has been frequently criticized by U.S. officials for supplying weapons to insurgent forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and for pressing ahead with a nuclear weapons program.
Rice said the U.S. would not meet with the top Iranian leaders until they suspend their uranium enrichment program, a stance she said is supported by the U.N. Security Council. Even a short suspension of Tehran's enrichment program, which could lead to the fissile material needed for an atomic weapon, would be welcome, she said.
«As long as the Iranians are talking and practicing enrichment, we're not getting anywhere,» Rice said.
Rice just returned from a trip to Iraq where she said progress has been made reducing violence since a surge of U.S. forces earlier this year, adding 30,000 troops for a total of more than 160,000 now.

And she finishes with this cheerful note:

«Iraq today is a different country than it was a year ago,» she said. But she also called the security gains fragile and said long-term success hinges on the Iraqis settling their political differences.

It sure is a different country from four years ago, too.

Even though they stopped in 2003?

Dan Froomkin of The Washington Post:

By concluding that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program four years ago, the national intelligence estimate released yesterday undermined a key element of President Bush's foreign policy. It raised questions about whether the president and vice president knowingly misled the public about the danger posed by Iran. And it added to Bush's profound credibility problems with the American people and the international community.

But to hear Bush talk about it at the White House press conference this morning, the new NIE vindicated his beliefs and makes his warnings about Iran more potent.

It was neck-snapping spin even by Bush standards. He intentionally misread the report's central point, failed to acknowledge a huge change in his argument for why Iran is dangerous and exhibited pure bullheaded stubbornness.

[snip]

Yesterday's report came as something as a shock to the general public. Bush and Vice President Cheney have long asserted that Iran was actively seeking nuclear weapons, and Cheney, in particular, had been accelerating what some observers saw as a drumbeat for war. But the nation's 16 intelligence agencies didn't come to their conclusion overnight. In fact, this NIE had been in the works for 18 months, during which some of its authors were reportedly harried by Cheney for not being sufficiently hawkish.

Read the whole thing for excellent links.

Steve Bates of The Yellow Doggerel Democrat points out the obvious: Cheney.

When in doubt, arm everybody

And stand back:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 U.S. military officials say a plan to arm Pakistani tribes against al-Qaida may be accelerated because of concern about instability in Pakistan.

The plan would finance a separate tribal paramilitary force and, if adopted, would likely increase the U.S. military presence in Pakistan, The New York Times reported Monday. Dozens of military trainers could be added to the estimated 50 troops the U.S. has there now, the newspaper said.

The classified proposal is modeled on a similar effort by U.S. forces in Anbar Province in Iraq. It would enlist Pakistani tribal leaders along the border with Afghanistan in the fight against an expanding al-Qaida and Taliban insurgency, the Times said.

U.S. military officials say the situation has taken on urgency because of the weakness of the Pakistani government and concerns about instability in Pakistan in light of President Pervez Musharraf's revocation of constitutional rule two weeks ago, the newspaper said.

This wonderfully amazing idea is so obviously from those who have done such a good job in Afghanistan and Iraq that I think I need to go dig a bunker in my backyard.....

Strange how Bush wants to smear democracy around the world

Except when it involves one of his friends:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- A Supreme Court hand-picked by President Gen. Pervez Musharraf swiftly dismissed legal challenges to his continued rule on Monday, opening the way for him to serve another five-year term - this time solely as a civilian president.

The opposition has denounced the new court, saying any decisions by a tribunal stripped of independent voices had no credibility. Musharraf purged the court Nov. 3 when he declared emergency rule, days before the tribunal was expected to rule on his eligibility to serve as president.

The United States has put immense pressure on Musharraf to restore the constitution and free thousands of political opponents jailed under the emergency before Pakistan's critical parliamentary election Jan. 8.

Monday's court ruling could hasten Musharraf's decision to give up his army post. The general has said he would quit as armed forces commander by the end of the month, assuming he was given the legal go-ahead by the court to remain as president.

[snip]

Negroponte, Washington's No. 2 diplomat, was blunt in comments Sunday after his meetings with Musharraf and other senior military and political figures, saying the emergency rule was "not compatible with free, fair and credible elections."

But Pakistan was quick to dismiss those concerns, saying the senior American diplomat brought no new proposals on his weekend visit, and received no assurances after urging Musharraf to restore the constitution.

The face-off leaves the Bush administration with limited options in steering its nuclear-armed ally back toward democracy.

But:

Senior Bush administration officials have said publicly that they have no plans to cut off the billions of dollars in military aid that Pakistan receives each year.

How very odd...

Musharraf, Bhutto, and the United States

The remarkable falling out between Bhutto and Musharraf since he declared a state of emergency nearly two weeks ago on the surface dashes all US hopes for a stable democratic government in Pakistan amenable to Washington's dictates in the "war on terror".

Yet the seemingly calamitous developments - which have provoked widespread demonstrations against Musharraf's government - might in fact still fit into the US's grand scheme for the embattled country: to gain control of its nuclear weapons so they do not fall into the hands of Islamist fanatics.

Contacts close to the power circles in Pakistan told Asia Times Online that there is a feeling that the US is prepared to take "hurricane" measures to ensure the safety of the country's nuclear arsenal. The thinking goes that by changing horses and supporting Bhutto, the US could exploit the current unrest by dictating new terms to Pakistan in the "war on terror" and coerce it into allowing the US to safeguard its nuclear stockpile.

[snip]

Enter, therefore, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, whom Musharraf is expected to meet "soon" in Riyadh for what the official Pakistani media describe as "important discussions".

Musharraf aims to convey to the West - and to the US in particular - through King Abdullah that the Americans would never be allowed to fill any vacuum in Pakistan. Rather, chaos will play directly into the hands of the very militants and extremists the West fears so much and who have ever-growing bases just hours from the capital in the tribal areas on the border with Afghanistan.

I mean...why would Pakistan resist? We've done so well in every other country we've dealt with in that area....