Bowser has provided a few examples of what is meant by:
"In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration’s critics as suffering from “moral or intellectual confusion” about what threatens the nation’s security and accused them of lacking the courage to fight back."
Though few critics are as confused as Bowser.
In general terms it seems like pretty good idea to have a large embassy in areas in the world in which a embassy could be a target for terrorist attack. And having it reinforced to withstand mortar attacks seems better choice than focusing such things picking marble facades which have a particularly nice color. Though, of course, this was mostly a State Dept decision rather than anything to do with Defense Dept.
And considering that State Dept a few years ago was needing tens of billions in order to improve the security posture of numerous embassies around the world [following major attacks on African embassies: "In 1998, the Clinton Administration demonstrated an atypically aggressive response toward terrorism after the assault on two U.S. embassies in Africa. On Aug. 7, 1998, the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, were bombed by terrorists, leaving 258 people dead and more than 5,000 injured."
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/newsfacts-sudanstrikes.html
]
In this instance of starting from stratch and using "lessons learned", it seems to be a State Dept following the general will of Congress and not just the Bush administration but also the direction of the former Clinton administration.
In other "news stories" a few mention that the apartments will be 700 sq feet- that doesn't seem very large though articles seem to suggest it is. And that they going spent about a billion dollars on this construction- if the new UN building was this cheap I would be happy. And I seem to recall a CIA headquarters in the US fairly recently costing around 5 billion. And in a world in which Federal govt spends 115 billion to repair damage by a hurriance AND at same time that's claimed it's not providing enough aid money in the same breath- well, a mere billion for US embassy in Iraq can only be an example of spending tax dollars very wisely [relatively].
Current Events » in reply to Same guy, 2002 - "the new Afghanistan 'a breathtaking accomplishment' and 'a successful model of what could happen to Iraq.'"
re: Same guy, 2002 - "the new Afghanistan 'a breathtaking accomplishment' and 'a successful model of what could happen to Iraq.'"
The whole thread (6 posts)
- Rumsfeld: War critics suffer 'moral confusion'
- How the AP reworked Rumsfeld's speech
- Rumsfeld should have been fired after Abu Garaib
- Rummy, about THEM - "The constant drumbeat of the things they say often, which are not true, is harmful over time."
- Same guy, 2002 - "the new Afghanistan 'a breathtaking accomplishment' and 'a successful model of what could happen to Iraq.'"
