[eDebate] The missile defense UQ issue (Why Stone Cant Read)

Jason Russell jasonlrussell1
Thu Apr 24 06:11:08 CDT 2008


To be clear, Stone's underlining skills basically highlighted the problems
featured in this evidence: this is simply Bush's rhetoric for his success at
the Sochi meeting with Putin, not a concrete "plan" to do anything. Bush
doesn't have the power to make that deal; Congress and all of NATO would
need to be involved. They have not. This evidence is basically as good as
saying, "Bush promises to love Russia long time". It literally means
nothing. We can only hope KU's cards will continue to be this bad. Ah, who
am I kidding. We can do more than hope.

Here' some evidence...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080406/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush (framework is only a
framework)
http://jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2372962 (it's rhetorical)
http://www.isria.info/INTRO/diplo_intro_08apr2008_US_Russia_Strategic_Dialogue.htm
(you'll
need a log-on for this one; your university may get you in through google
scholar; lots of in-depth analysis of the new "framework agreement")
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=1904 (searing analysis
from people smarter than Fortune)

In closing, here's exactly what Putin, the soul of modern Russia, had to say
on the issue (from the Washington Post on April 7, 2008)

The language was not finalized until the presidents met Sunday morning.
Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Condoleezza+Rice?tid=informline>and
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei
Lavrov<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Sergei+Lavrov?tid=informline>exchanged
drafts during a dinner the night before and told the presidents in
the morning that they were just words apart. The Russians wanted to say
Bush's confidence-building ideas would be important in "easing" their
concerns, a senior U.S. official said. Rice pushed for "assuaging." Putin
agreed to "assuaging." But at a news conference afterward, Putin offered a
measured assessment. "This is not about language, this is not about
diplomatic phrasing or wording," he said. "This is about the substance of
the issue. I'd like to be very clear on this. Our fundamental attitude to
the American plans have not changed. However, certain progress is obvious.
Our concerns have been heard by the United States."

So, Stone and Cormack are wrong to act like we're sitting around building
Star Wars with the Red Army. Bush, a lame duck with less than a year left to
go, made an agreement in principle with the out-going Russian President on
the basic outline that it'd be great if someday they could cooperate.
Obviously, we all think that the topic should do more than this. Are we
likely to break groun on building a missile defense system with Russia in
the next 10 months? No. Not with political change there, an election year
here, and incredibly tight American fiscal situation, especially on the
defense side.

Here's where reading comprehension comes into play, Jayhawks: doing more
than flying off the handle because you saw one article in a pop culture
finance magazine by an unattributable source evaluating statements from a
cowboy president whose public pronouncements are as good as tin.

J
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20080424/c1623166/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list