CP on February 29, 2008 at 1:58 PM

Thank you for the clarification. Yes, it is in our interest for the reasons you stated. I was primarily responding mostly to the “We do need to work with the Turks and the proper Kurdish factions to come to a solution.”

I am by no means an isolationist and I fully understand that global power comes with global responsibility BUT I also believe that America shouldn’t unilaterally insert itself into every single global squabble. If the world is so concerned about the Darfur region of the Sudan, why isn’t the UN or some other nation/group taking the lead on resolving the problem instead of whining that the US hasn’t done enough? Why was every nation willing to let Saddam Hussein ignore the disarmament sanctions until the US said “not so fast?”

In the case of the Kurdish/Turkish dispute, I think we need to tread lightly for some of the same reasons you say we should act. Most importantly because it seems to be sending mixed messages. We want the central Iraqi government to stand up and take on more responsibility yet we then get involved in what is essentially a squabble between Iraq and Turkey? I’d be in favor of having Dr. Rice act as an intermediary but we don’t need to be taking sides in a border dispute between our NATO ally and our best hope at attaining a politically stable and democratic(ish)Middle Eastern government.

And this is an American problem because….????????

While this nation can’t be isolationist, it is sheer lunacy to think that we can “work with the proper factions” to resolve issues that date back to when the Ottoman Empire was carved up at the end of WWI.

highhopes on February 29, 2008 at 9:42 AM

A resolution to this situation is in our interest for several reasons – we don’t need Turkey getting into a war with the non-PKK Kurds; we don’t need Turkey and the central Iraqi gov’t to be at odds over this; the PKK are terrorists and we undermine our policy vis-a-vis the GWOT by ignoring them; ignoring the PKK and condemning Turkey for dealing with them is counterproductive to our important relationship with Turkey, a NATO ally and key player in the region. When I said “work with the proper factions”, I didn’t mean I expect a kumbaya moment. But, we have a relationship and some influence with the non-PKK Kurds who have a very effective security force and we can provide intelligence cooperation with the Turkish government.

alphie on February 29, 2008 at 11:41 AM

First, let me welcome you. I imagine your comments will continue to be a source of amusement :D

I mean the ignorance on display is spectacular.

Of all your missstated and misunderstood comments, this

You’re the one who referred to the benefits American private-sector workers have bought and paid for through special taxes as “the problem.”

is probably easiest to refute.

If those benefits were actually completely paid for by those special taxes, there wouldn’t be a problem. The problem is that we’re paying out more than we’re taking in. So clearly, those benefits are not bought, and not paid for, by the special taxes.

Me? I’d rather the gov’t give me that money, and let me invest it myself.

You say “…Or else what?”

Good question. Answer: The payees will probably sue us. And win.

You also said “We have to pay the funds according to the schedules Congress set up because Congress’ hands are tied — by Congress!”

Good point. You’ll get no argument from me.

Akzed: Beggin’ pardon but I’ve typically been one of the one-third of the federal workforce that actually WORKS and has to carry the other two-thirds. I get just a wee bit sensitive when some yahoo figures they have the right to ask me to give up a retirement I’ve actively worked hard to earn. I’d never ask anyone else to give up their retirement benefits, and definitely empathize when companies and entire industries shrivel up and leave workers hanging out to dry with no retirement…particularly when they were led to expect a good one. Heck, if things get bad enough for the government, it’s not outside the realm of the possible for federal retirement benefits to crumble also.

As far as Olby goes, well, whatever. I was responding to somebody suggesting I give up a retirement I earned. Not sure Olby’d fault me for that. And if he wants to waste his time on me, well, whatever. Truly, I’m small potatoes around here.

ALPHIE: ACTUALLY, sir, a little competition IS good for U.S. government employees. Please Google “OMB Circular A-76″. It’s all about public/private sector competition and the outsourcing of federal functions that ought to be handled by the private sector. A-76 is something the Bush administration has pushed VERY VERY hard for. And a number of federal (mostly defense-related) functions and activities HAVE been outsourced to the private sector. You’ve simply never heard about it on the news. But watch A-76 fade to irrelevance once the libs get back in power.

As for the relative effectiveness of the Turkish military vs. US military in Iraq, my response is: I’m a civilian employee, bub. Go ask a military man that question. I’m not sufficiently knowledgeable enough about military operations to respond intelligently on that specific point.

*sigh*

You’re the one who referred to the benefits American private-sector workers have bought and paid for through special taxes as “the problem.”

If the Turks have managed to do in a week what the U.S. military has failed to do in six years (and a trillion dollars), maybe we should hire them to handle Iraq for us.

Or is a little competition bad for U.S. government employees?

Shirotayama on February 29, 2008 at 11:23 AM

Whoa man, ouch, right in ‘e eye, man… You want Olby to see that nastitude?

…Or else what?

This has to be the most idiotic flim-flam in the 10,000-year history of human government. All those times leaders cliamed: “Build me a temple, or a giant lizard will eat all of us,” look like sheer genious compared to this “entitlement” gibberish.

“We have to pay the funds according to the schedules Congress set up because Congress’ hands are tied — by Congress!”

Geesh. At least give people some credit here. Even if we all know it’s not true, couldn’t these people have the common decency to at least PRETEND they think there’s a giant lizard out there?

No, of course they can’t. They have to take half of my income, and then treat me like I’m a brain-dead imbicile to boot.

Toss whatever you want back at me, Alphie.
I won’t see it.

Shiro out.

From where I sit, our empire is CONTRACTING. Radical Islam on the rise, wanting to rebuild a modern Caliphate. China’s rise into the new superpower, if not yet, SOON. China also holding a significant enough portion of my employer’s debt where if they came calling for repayment of ALL of it without warning, both you AND me AND everybody else would see chaos of a type no one in our generation has yet seen.

Why’d you think I:

a) Came BACK into government, and
b) STAY here? I’ve had private sector offers. GOOD ones. Fact is, I enjoy working for the feds and don’t wanna leave.

FUCK YOU. I DO work for a living. And I’ve EARNED my retirement.

So go FUCK YOURSELF.

alphie on February 29, 2008 at 11:16 AM

Generous government retirement package? ROTFLMAO!

What the heck are you smoking this morning? Or are you just misinformed?

I agree with you, the impression I got is that Alphie was railing against the war and trying to argue that it was the war that has us broke.

I was trying to simultaneously refute his argument and yet set the record straight for a conservative blog-reading public. Since I really enjoy it when other conservatives are right when they speak, and have the facts behind them.

You also say “one of my greatest fears is that Obama will do what the Clintons did in 1993. They essentially gutted the military by diverting all the funding to their pet liberal projects. The so-called “peace dividend” that was spent on social welfare is part of the reason terrorists were able to commit the 9/11/01 atrocities and part of the reason why the military is straining to keep up the mission after five years of combat in two theaters. We need a robust military and neither Democrat running for office is fit to be the troops Commander-in-Chief. This is the one area where McCain really is the best choice even though the rest of his agenda is far to left-of-center to be President.”

Highhopes, I could NOT agree with you more. At the end of the 1st Bush admin, and beginning of the Clinton admin, I actually worked for a large 3-letter intel agency and we worked closely with the military. The gutting of our agency, and I’m sure most of the others in “the community” as well as the military itself, actually began during Bush 41. Well…not gutting…Bush 41 FROZE further development. The true gutting started when the Clintons came into office.

Things got so bad, I chose to leave an established career in my early 30’s, got to MBA school, build an entirely new career, worked for a number of years in the private sector before coming back into government again several years ago when a company I was working for looked like it was about to go belly up. (fortunately for them they turned it around and if I’d been able to hang on, I’d be a LOT richer than I am now!)

I’m with ya. Assuming Obama (or even Hillary) wins, my top priority will be to try and find a federal position outside of DC proper, since I don’t give this city 8 years before some jihadi gets hold of a nuke and detonates it in a Hertz or Penske truck on 15th Street right underneath my office.

THIS is one among several reasons why I railed against people deciding not to vote this year because McCain is the GOP (likely) nominee. Faced with voting for the greater or lesser of two evils, I’ll pick the lesser. I’m not a fan o McCain’s record myself. But by comparison with Bambi or Hitlery, there’s just no choice. Survival instinct drives me to vote for whoever the Republican nominee is next November.

Are you going to refuse to take your generous government retirement package at the end of your career?

Or is it just us private sector employees you think should give up their benefits for American Empire expansion?

Thanks for the response, I have fond memories of watching Reagan’s first inaugural parade from outside your building.

I agree we are “broke” in the way you delineated discretionary and non-discretionary budgets. I somehow don’t think Alfie was railing against the portion of the budget that includes entitlement programs.

That being said, one of my greatest fears is that Obama will do what the Clintons did in 1993. They essentially gutted the military by diverting all the funding to their pet liberal projects. The so-called “peace dividend” that was spent on social welfare is part of the reason terrorists were able to commit the 9/11/01 atrocities and part of the reason why the military is straining to keep up the mission after five years of combat in two theaters. We need a robust military and neither Democrat running for office is fit to be the troops Commander-in-Chief. This is the one area where McCain really is the best choice even though the rest of his agenda is far to left-of-center to be President.

1. BORROW it (Bureau of the Public Debt) and drive up the national debt and our interest owed on that debt

or

2. PRINT lots of money (Bureau of Engraving & Printing, who make the paper bills, and the US Mint, who stamp the metal coins), beyond the amounts demanded for normal economic commerce in the economy. This is often a BAD idea because it tends to send inflation skyrocketing and is one of several reasons why Germany collapsed economically after WWI. Which resulted in the Third Reich. Which resulted in an even huger World War later. Lots of dead and maimed people and lots of money lost, whole economies destroyed. Like I said, BAD idea.

Not trying to support Alphie’s argument here, since I support the war on terror fully, including the Iraq and Afghanistan operations (and actually wish we’d take Iran’s government down before it’s too late).

But…

For the wrong reasons, Alphie’s right: We’re BROKE.

I work for US Treasury Department Headquarters. RIGHT next to the White House. Flip over your $10 bill. I am sitting in the building you see on the back of that bill right now.

Alfie (and lots of liberals) are wrong in thinking it’s the war that’s got us broke. It ain’t the war. When you look at the details of the federal budget and see how much the war effort is taking up, it needs to be put into perspective.

Most folks don’t know that the US government budget really needs to be thought of in two huge different chunks, one much larger than the other: The DISCRETIONARY chunk, and the NON-DISCRETIONARY chunk.

Stuff like the war, like social programs excluding the entitlement programs (this will become important in a minute), like operating the federal government’s agencies and their bureaus, etc., is part of the discretionary budget. That’s the part that gets submitted to OMB and to Congress for review, edit, and approval every year.

The discretionary piece is a SMALL slice of the entire federal budget pie…maybe 30% to 40%…the HUGE piece is the Non-discretionary piece. And what makes up this piece?

The ENTITLEMENT programs: Social Security (huge), Medicare (Even HUGER and dwarfs Social Security), and Medicaid (not that big, actually, by comparison to the other two).

Both Barry O and Shrillary want to mandate universal health insurance coverage. In other words, add MORE ENTITLEMENT to the non-discretionary budget, when we can’t borry money FAST ENOUGH to cover what we currently have, let alone once the baby boom generation starts retiring in droves. SOON.

Alphie’s right. We’re broke. But for entirely the wrong reasons. Barry O. could stop the war on a dime tomorrow, and the change in how broke we are really wouldn’t make much of an impact. SERIOUSLY.

Even IF the libs don’t take POTUS, and don’t keep both houses of congress, we’re broke. If they sweep POTUS and both houses, we’re gonna be one hell of a lot MORE broke.

We’re broke.

alphie on February 29, 2008 at 10:26 AM

Nonsense.

You just don’t like the way the government is spending the money it has.

Turkey is on the fast track to full Islamization and Iraq can NEVER be moderate democracy, as most of it’s citizens are eather Shi’a or Sunni extremists.

They are? I’d sure like to see those numbers.

Can we not blow another $200 billion on nation building in Iraq this year, please?

We’re broke.

They are in the process of moderating and modernizing interpretations of Islam.

Buy Danish on February 29, 2008 at 10:10 AM

No they aren’t. I was truly amazed at the amount of people here who have fallen for this BS. The centrality of jihad in Islam and general hatred against the kufr can not be modernised away by changing around a few hadiths. The Turks know that most westerners will not study Islam and are in fact counting on it.

Turkey is on the fast track to full Islamization …

Aristotle on February 29, 2008 at 9:42 AM

They are in the process of moderating and modernizing interpretations of Islam.