... and, like the Sopranos' ending, either you appreciated it or you didn't, regardless of whether you "liked" it or "agreed" with it.

I will say that if Cary and/or others are fabricating letters (and it certainly seems that way at times), I'm equally disturbed by the consistent omission of fairly crucial details -- which all too often turns SYA into a pointless circle jerk ...

If these letters are "professionally generated," then I am left to suspect that these omission are deliberate ... and that the authors are deliberately creating pointless "discussions" ... which is rather contemptable, imho.

Al Qaeda Strikes Back

Bruce Riedel

From Foreign Affairs, May/June 2007

Summary: By rushing into Iraq instead of finishing off the hunt for Osama bin Laden, Washington has unwittingly helped its enemies: al Qaeda has more bases, more partners, and more followers today than it did on the eve of 9/11. Now the group is working to set up networks in the Middle East and Africa -- and may even try to lure the United States into a war with Iran. Washington must focus on attacking al Qaeda's leaders and ideas and altering the local conditions in which they thrive.

url:http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070501faessay86304/bruce-riedel/al-qaeda-strikes-back.html

Author also appears to STILL believe that "Al-Qaeda" is an entity ... like a corporation ... so I wouldn't sell the farm.

like the run-up to Iraq, this is all smoke and mirrors, a cacophony endlessly repeated talking points and sound-bites ... until "verification" become impossible,

unimpeachable sources" doubted and the "conventional wisdom" rules.

It is perfectly reasonable for people in Iran, some of whom may or may be be in the military and/or government, banking or industry, who may or may not be acting in an "official capacity" or "blackmarket" capacity to be supplying Iraqi shi'ia who -- it should be noted, were not the FAT CAT banker class or the holders of high military rank or likely privy to the fire-sale looting of Iraq's banks and depots on our arrival ... (I have wondered about the state of the newly created Shiia nouveau rich embezzler class and if any have stayed in Iraq).

Personally, I suspect that the Saudis are materially assisting the Sunni, specifically the anti-Qaeda Sunnis... I'd love to prove it! And Syria and Lebanon and Jordan and everyone else who can be said to be aiding and abetting which ever side anyone cares to claim ...

"Trust but verify" is been made inoperable ... planned obsolence.

Nuclear proliferation is not discouraged by threats of attack.

Why is it that we only attack non-nuclear countries?

Threatening attack to curb nuclear proliferation is like using credit cards to get out of debt.

Nuclear winter is not a viable response to nuclear proliferation (global warming, high oil prices)

The worlds does not have only two sides ... "our side" and "the enemy"

The rest of the world does not acknowledge the need of our approval -- get over it.

Actually, my usual suspicion wrt things like this NYT cover piece is that they both represent giving Cheney the payback he demands for access (I don't think Condi has equal power in commandeering the front page in this manner)... and -- since it's Saturday -- usually it's a matter of laying the foundation for the Sunday morning on the news shows ... where it will be laid on thick ... however, apparently not this time ...

Oddly, there's no obvious guest in tomorrow's line up ... Petraeus and Tom Friedman will be on fox and Seymour Hersh on CNN late edition ... 60 minutes is on a half-billion dollars aid stolen from iraqi treasury (listed as new, not a repeat)

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et-tvtalkweb16jun16,0,7851499.story?coll=cl-tvent-utility-right

and articles, like this in the Times, diminish Rice's credibility and make her less effective. period. That Cheney, with a dozen catastrophes and scandals in recent years, is even in competition is a slap at Rice.

Yes, there are CEOs who claim that having top management in competition with one another sharpens performance ... but damn it, this is not "business" or "product development" ... and it's not about who gives the better presentation ...

Bush seems genuinely moved, in his gut, enthralled by Cheney's high-testosterone bravado ... and bored by the tedious girly-girl nit-picking amorphous process of diplomacy.

Cheney may stroke-out with frustration, but he's not going anywhere and Bush won't ask him -- that insane "loyalty" bullshit. In the meantime, he's got a death grip on his power -- they're gonna hafta pry it from his "cold dead hands."

I fear we have only "legacy" concerns keeping Bush in check -- Iraq and the deficit and the future of the Republican party (and all those donors and power to be lost)