Carlyle Group founder disses Dubya!
b_rieux at yahoo.com
Tue Jul 8 00:42:47 MDT 2003
Xenon Zi-Neng Yuan:
>>i just thought it interesting to see the competing
interests at play and bring it to light. the left may
not ultimately "care" or have sympathy for dissension
within the ruling circles, but i personally think we
should be aware of them and perhaps even use them to
our advantage when possible. traditional
conservatives, top military brass, and the
intelligence agencies, not to mention the neo-liberals
of the clinton and soros variety, are starting to
choose sides and even break ranks with the neo-con
clique. why is this not significant?<<
Let's see, they chose sides prior to 9-11 and
'debated' whether or not Bush or McCain was their man.
The Republican party platform is built around regime
change in certain countries, and Iraq has long been
top of the list. They chose sides after 9-11 and
debated not IF but when to attack Iraq, and they
debated how many allies does it take to spell
'unilateralism'. In other words, it was all
pseudo-debate designed to take the microphone away
from anyone who had anything to say besides what they
wanted to hear (e.g., attack Iraq now or attack them
next year after we've wheedled and cajoled France and
Germany into supporting us).
So in short, I can't for the life of me see the
significance of it. None of these guys are going to
meet you at the barricades, so I wouldn't read too
much into any of their sniping. I suppose right now
they are debating whether or not Bush will need 200
million dollars to steal another election, or if 150
million will do it.
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
More information about the Marxism