The US DoD and the GSA Join the Liberty Project 182
An anonymous reader writes "The Liberty Alliance Project announced today that the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) have joined the Liberty Alliance in its pursuit to develop open and interoperable standards for electronically managing identity information."
Woo hoo (Score:5, Funny)
Great, that should really speed things up...
To be fair (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:To be fair (Score:2)
I suppose that this is better than Palladium. And I can't say much else in favor of it. Personal information should be managed locally, with possibly id certification keys being stored centrally (to reduce identity theft only). But this isn't what they seem to be after.
They want to 0wn you as much as MS does, they just don't want to be 0wn3d by MS themselves.
Liberty Alliance has it backwards (Score:5, Informative)
I highly recommend you read Doc Searles [weblogs.com] and David Wienbergers [hyperorg.com] views on this [worldofends.com] to see why any implementation of DigID that is corporate centered rather than individual centered is PURE EVIL, and will be used for all sorts of nefarois things, from total erasure of shopping anonymonity, total profiling, and even BLACKLISTING. This is bad stuff, pure and simple.
Planet P Blog [planetp.cc]
Re:Liberty Alliance has it backwards (Score:3, Funny)
I just scanned the article....yep he mentions that piece of crap.
So then you support the Liberty Alliance? (Score:2)
The whole point of the Liberty Alliance, from casual reading and demos I have seen, is to provide a federated storage of identity data - so you, the customer, can choose a provider to store your full set of identity information (one hopes that would include even an individual being able to hold his information on a local server, but even so it means it's not just Microsoft holding the data in a giant juicy target somewhere). Then anywhere you go where you want to make use of the data, you get to choose what part of your identity you want revealed - for instance you could expose an address but not a credit card number.
It's no good to rant about all forms of digital identification without understanding the form of what you are ranting against. This kind of witchhuntery is just the sort of thing that will give Passport a leg up and REALLY give you something to cry about!
Checking out... (Score:2)
[growls]
It's a pack of gum!
And that's why I love the Liberty Alliance... (Score:1)
Re:Liberty Alliance has it backwards (Score:1)
Re:Liberty Alliance has it backwards (Score:1)
Heh, considering how widespread corruption is and how many politicians are in cahoots with the industry, I'd say most governments are for-profit organizations....
Re:Woo hoo (Score:2, Funny)
PKI Anyone? (Score:1)
Enough of your Borax Poindextor (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Enough of your Borax Poindextor (Score:3, Funny)
KFG
Re:Enough of your Borax Poindextor (Score:1, Funny)
The problem with universal standards (Score:5, Insightful)
The opportunity for fraud in a universal system like this is just waiting to be exploited.
Re:The problem with universal standards (Score:2, Interesting)
eg - recall recently one of the root dns servers moved away from bind in case bind were to have some unknown flaw that was exploited and used to shut down all the root servers.
Re:The problem with universal standards (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The problem with universal standards (Score:3, Insightful)
If they have a security hole, do not suppose that a simple non-standard format will stop knowing the data content. Feeling safe with the format of the file (at least, if it don't have strong encription) is in fact another vulnerability.
The main problem with not using a open, universal standard is that you tie you information (that should last teorically at least, forever) to some vendor format, if the vendor don't support that standard anymore, or the vendor is gone, then you data simply becomes inaccesible (specially if you have to thank DMCA to give you the inability to make alternative programs to open that format). And losing all your data is a major security problem, and is a risk you have if you don't use an open standard or at least a format that you own.
Re:The problem with universal standards (Score:1)
Great, we know the M$ track record for security.
Re:The problem with universal standards (Score:3, Interesting)
Worst case scenerio, provided that the protocol is secure, is we get one of the root sites info (like a bank) and all the bank's accounts get screwed up. But we know how anal banks are about security.
I haven't looked at the information that much, but I thought it was supposed to be pretty much PGP for online forms and accounts. It will make those things that you fear, harder to do.
As much as I liked the project, it worries me when the government gets involved. The presence of the DoD always sends my paranoia up about 5 points on a scale of 1 to 10. They have no real need for this system except to track people.
If it weren't for the Liberty Alliance Project though, you would have to trust your private information to MS(Passport), because sites in the future will require one or the other kind of verification.
Which is less evil... DoD or MS?
Great! (Score:4, Interesting)
My travel worries are over!
Seriously, this stuff scares the crap out of me.
How long until you need to sign up for the Federal Identify Network to get a credit card? A drivers license? A job?
-Brett
Re:Great! (Score:1)
Re:Great! (Score:3, Interesting)
It's one thing for government agents to have to go through various levels of protocol to get access to all your records. It's another thing for them to have a central database of everywhere you've been and gone.
We've created a system of laws where almost everyone can be procecuted for something. Now, we're creating networks of data that allow much easier manipulation.
Piss off a higher-up?
Database notes: Subject has been to Amsterdam.
Action: Attach a +20% possibility of being able to bust 'citizen' for drug use.
I know, you've never done anything illegal in your life and have nothing to hide. Tell yourself that when they come for you.
-Brett
Re:Great! (Score:1)
Re:Great! (Score:1)
Would you rather have to sign up for a MS Passport ID instead? If the Liberty Project is evil, it's probabily the lesser of two.
Re:Great! (Score:1)
Now if they could just replace Orbitz so I could constantly feel like they were watching me during the 1,000 times a day I close that darn pop-up window!
Re:Great! (Score:5, Interesting)
"When a place gets crowded enough to require ID's, social collapse is not far away. It is time to go elsewhere. The best thing about spce travel is that it made it possible to go elsewhere."
Other useful quotes at http://www.musespace.com/musings/quotes/lazaruslo
Re:Great! (Score:1)
Are you suggesting that the best alternative to a Microsoft Passport type scheme would be colonizing other planets?
Re:Great! (Score:2)
I don't put any faith in anecdotes so vague that they can't be disproven.
BTW, I'm looking forward to spice-travel...
Re:Great! (Score:2)
Arguably the myrad of wars that we are seeing today are part of the result of the social collapse that has been happening.
Most of the "IDs" that are in existance have not been around for "hundreds" of years. In fact most "IDs" from more than 75 years ago were actually affiliation marks, rather than unique IDs.
I also am looking forward to spIce-travel, though I would rather see useful spAce-travel. Initially that also would require unique ID's, however low tech collonies very well may not require such, being more concerned with whether the next harvest will support the children bourn this season.
-Rusty
Re:Great! (Score:1)
Re:Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
Think Kerberos [mit.edu] cross realm authentication. If school x enters into a agreement with school y that students from each school will be able to use network resources on the other campus, the easiest way to manage that is to set the KDC to allow cross realm authen (using a shared secret) and then set up ACLs to allow any UID from the other school access to those resources that are to be shared.
Umm, is this a Good Thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Umm, is this a Good Thing? (Score:2)
But for gods sake, why does the government need to get their fingers involved in this? It couldn't possibly lead to any good.
Could it?
Re:Umm, is this a Good Thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see what the brouhaha is all about here. Not like they couldn't get their hands on the technology anyway. It is supposed to be an open spec.
Re:Umm, is this a Good Thing? (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe they're just out to make it easier to implement the DoD's "Total Information Awareness" thingy. Y'know, get the public to do most of the work for 'em by putting all their relevent data into one convenient, easy-to-parse-and-mine linked database.
-- Horse_Pheathers, really looking forward to the day when some government drone can not only easily find out where I work, but by perusing my credit records know how often I buy condoms. "Nice sex life you have there Mr. Pheathers..."
Alright! (Score:4, Insightful)
With a name like that... (Score:4, Insightful)
This shouldn't be a suprise because of..... (Score:2)
sadly...
Re:This shouldn't be a suprise because of..... (Score:1)
slashdot effect (Score:2, Funny)
In addition to the information you knowingly provide us, we keep track of the domains and IP numbers from which people visit us. We also collect site usage statistics such as web browser types and page requests and track users' movements. This data is not personally identifiable and is used to more efficiently operate our business, prepare for network load demands, promote the services and administer the site. To the extent this information is associated with a particular user, that information will be considered personally identifiable information and will be protected accordingly.
Aha! a website that actually prepares itself for the slashdot effect!
Re:slashdot effect (Score:3, Funny)
How you can decide what communications you will receive: You may click here {add opt-out link} if you do not wish to receive further communications from the Liberty Alliance. We will use reasonable efforts to process any change you make as promptly as possible.
Sorta like a TODO in code that was never finished, right? I'm glad the Liberty Alliance are on the ball here! Especially since security and privacy big concerns for them.
Government is getting a clue (Score:5, Insightful)
They've had a clue for a while (Score:2)
In regards to single-signon there is probably a lot that can be done with certificates and or keys to estabilish a consistent online identity, but with a minimum of personal data. The personal data, if needed at all, has no need to be kept together with the keys.
Corporations have now gotten to the point where they must be obliged to respect the Bill of Rights and other legislation just as governments. They [proven] risk and damage from abuse is just to harmful otherwise.
linky linky (Score:1, Informative)
http://www.idg.com.hk/cw/readstory.asp?aid=200303
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,109730,
Why is everyone talking (Score:5, Insightful)
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Re:Why is everyone talking (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Why is everyone talking (Score:1)
I think this is for something like authenticating users on internal govenrment networks, a place I dont want MS to be given thier security track record.
Re:Why is everyone talking (Score:2)
You're new here, aren't you?
[sorry, just could not resist]
what a coincidence... (Score:1, Funny)
Isn't it amazing how the DARPA TIA program gets limboized by congress, is effectively DOA, and then the DOD just HAPPENS to jump onto the Liberty Project? What's Poindexters new position, DOD rep. to the Liberty Project?
LOL, I mean JESUS, just how stupid do they think we ar... mmmm, donuts....
-rt
My Identity Dream (Score:5, Interesting)
I dream that my license will actually be linked to my prooven ability to drive safely, and not other issues like child support or failure to file state taxes, drinking a beer in the dorms, etc.... And that I won't be tracked and stored in massive centralized gov databases that have almost always prooven to be totally screwed up. (getting rid of frivolous tickets wile you're at it would be nice too)
I dream that I won't be harassed when I try to buy beer, ciggarates, and spray paint (one time I was even carded because I tried to buy a cigarette lighter).
I dream that my right to bear arms won't be nickled and dimed to death by people wanting to register me in govt databases like the Nazi's had before they confiscated all privately owned guns from its citizens.
I dream that my credit will only be checked when I want a loan from the bank, and not when I just want a debit card, not when a bank wants to send me a credit card offer that I half to shred before I throw out, and not when I try to get auto insurance.
Can you think of any others...
Re:My Identity Dream (Score:1, Insightful)
I dream that I can rent a private mailbox without registering 2 forms of ID with the US postal authority (not a PO box mind you). And that the next time the US post office faces competition from people who offer better service, they will try to compete on service rather than impose new federal postal regulations.
I dream that I can register my own domain name without exposing my personal home address to every pervert on the internet and email address to every spammer in existence.
I dream that I can get phone, gas, electric, and internet service - where paying for them is good enough - other forms and paperwork and ID not being neecissary.
I dream that the government can find a way to opperate without requiring plates on my car like they can find a way to survive without requiring a publicly displayed ID on 99% of the other stuff I own.
I dream that next time I rent an appartment, being able to pay and show respect for property will be good enough. No backgound checks, credit checks, listing everywhere you've lived for the last 7 years etc...
ok, that should be enough for now....
Re:My Identity Dream (Score:1)
Re:My Identity Dream (Score:3, Interesting)
Uhh, first off, from my history I seem to renember that almost all the federalist papers were written with a nom-de-plum (anonymous), since they are partly responsible for the founding of US society - I think I should be able to do just fine with an anomynous attitude.
Second, almost ALL of the intrusions on privacy I talked about happened in the last 50 years or so. So that begs the question, how come we were able to do fine for the other 150 years of this country's existence. Are you suggesting that as we become more modern we need to intrude into other peoples lives more
Third, I don't think I asked for total anominity or unaccountability to paying for services I use and never suggested that I am or should be an island totally seperate from everybody else. I just don't want the anal probe every single time. I'm tired of it.
Funny (Score:2)
Funny stuff.
I'll leave you with a question:
When I exchange things ov value with another person, what gives you the right to know anything about that transaction?
Re:My Identity Dream (Score:1)
I also think that you must be pretty young if you still get harassed about cigarettes.
Actually that wasn't the point, I'm over 30 and have never smoked.
Re:My Identity Dream (Score:1)
Your comment about the Nazis is a myth and has no basis in fact. The gun laws in Germany were in effect before Hitler came to power. Hitler had no reason to ban guns - he was a popular leader in his country.
You are right, it happened before he came to power ..... Adolph Hitler, 15 April 1935, in address to the Reichsta, "This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future! "
this is ironic (Score:2, Insightful)
Identity information basically means "government tracking".
Re:this is ironic (Score:2)
Not only that but we could even be given the choice of having an anonymous online identity which could only be 'tracked' to an account number with the only access given to an individual with the right password...
Now if you go about saying "Hey I'm #58274923793 at the Westfalia Inc. identity depot!" "Track me!" then you might have a problem.
Reality steps in of course and says that yes you will be tracked to a degree, but certainly no more than you are being tracked at the present and with no finer granularity than at present either. In fact if you're the average joe, why would anyone care to track you? Marketing?
Re:this is ironic (Score:1)
what about the "Patriot Act"?
What about Newspeak [newspeakdictionary.com] ?
GSA (Score:1, Funny)
It could be MUCH worse (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It could be MUCH worse (Score:1)
It's bad enough that private companies are trying to do this. There's no reason the government needs to help the process along.
Re:It could be MUCH worse (Score:2, Insightful)
All we have to do is make sure Microsoft isn't involved in it, and it's bound to be free and wonderful.
Right.
Re:It could be MUCH worse (Score:2)
Re:It could be MUCH worse (Score:2, Insightful)
The thing that really bugs me is that its being sold to us as an open standard, so of course we support open standards. It's ridiculous, especially since this technology has NO BENEFIT to the consumer whatsoever. The vast majority of internet users simply don't log out of their websites. How many people have you seen with MSN messenger set to remember the password, giving access to the contents of their email? Not the most secure choice, obviously, but when you're trading cookie recipes, its hardly much of an issue at all.
Of course (Score:2)
complainers (Score:4, Interesting)
Idiots.
Would you rather government mandated Microsoft Passport?
A system that allows you to login only once is desired in the market place. A standard is desired. This market demand will be fulfilled whether you like it or not. Which entity do you trust the most to implement this standard? Or are you naive enough to think that we won't have a federated identity on the net in the near future?
Re:complainers (Score:2)
I'd rather just have multiple passwords for different things. Inconvenient? Perhaps, but at least I don't have one single point of failure. Really, as far as I can see, both of these services are just offering me a single point of failure. Was the market really crying out for that? Maybe I should design a bridge with one support column and patent it.
Re:complainers (Score:2, Insightful)
Why can't people just criticise Microsoft when they come out with a plan but cheer on others when they offer a near identical plan? It's like people these days value consistency more than hypocrisy.
Those who sacrifice... (Score:3, Funny)
From the FAQs (Score:4, Informative)
A: The vision of the Liberty Alliance Project is to enable a networked world in which individuals and businesses can more easily conduct transactions while protecting the privacy and security of vital identity information. To accomplish its vision, the Liberty Alliance will establish an open standard for federated network identity through open technical specifications that will:
Support a broad range of identity-based products and services
Enable commercial and non-commercial organizations to realize new revenue and cost saving opportunities that economically leverage their relationships with customers, business partners, and employees
Provide consumers with choice of identity provider(s), the ability to link accounts through account federation, and the convenience of single sign-on, when using any network of connected services and devices
Increase ease-of-use for consumers to help stimulate e-commerce
Yeah, yeah. The gub'ment gonna undermine all those goals and blah blah conspiracy blah blah.
This is going to happen, and it's best it emerge as an open standard. Sane citizens of the 21st century want a secure and verifiable identity for e-commerce (which extends past the net, swiping your card for a bag of Doritos at the 7-11 really crosses into e-commerce)
Heh. (Score:1)
I'll bet the University of Texas [slashdot.org] is eager to get in on this project too.
Okay, here's the poop (Score:5, Interesting)
An example. Let's say you want to register yourself as a sole proprietor sales company. There's a myriad of organizations you will ultimately have to deal with, from OSHA to federal and state income and sales tax agencies to warranting that you're a drug-free employer or a nondiscriminatory one or whatever the latest law is. You'd like a one-stop shopping location, perhaps NewBusiness.gov, which acts a front-end to all these agencies at all levels and pulls it all together for you. Now that'd be nice, wouldn't it? Or how about one-stop location for handling all the stuff that deals with disasters? Or moving to Michigan? Or going to grad school, complete with Pell Grants and checks for available assistantships?
This is what the government wants to do. They know that they are fractured into little beaucracies beyond usefulness to the average citizen. So there is a major MAJOR initiative, fronted by the Bush White House, to make the government work together so it can be more responsive and helpful to you. National Science Foundation, GSA, a bunch of groups are working on this. They want to move the government into the twentieth century at least, much less the twenty-first!
Trouble is, how does the government know it's you who's applying for the Pell grant, as opposed to Joe Fraud who's stolen your identity? They need some kind of potent self-identification. But right now the government is scared spitless about using even cookies on its websites for fear that privacy spooks will start rumors that they're tracking your every move and a congressman will immediately put them out of work.
So the government is also trying to find ways to make it possible for you to manage, distribute in a protected fashion, verify, and guarantee your identity, or even act anonymously in a way you know they can't reasonably crack. Otherwise citizens will never ever use these services. They know this.
Commercial crap like MSN Passport just aint' gonna cut it. Passport has a dismal privacy record. Hence the interest in Liberty Alliance etc.
Yes, the Total Information Awareness project is scary (though anyone who's involved in the project can tell you it basically has no teeth at all -- it's a paper tiger). And various spook agencies are impressive at digging into your private live: well, at least the one in Maryland is anyway. But what's going on in this iniative is, in fact, totally benign. The government wants to really give you your bang for the tax buck, and are trying to figure out how they can do so without scarying you spitless on the privacy side.
There are in fact people in the government who are there because they want to help make the world better, you know! Not many. But they're there.
-- a researcher in the DC area...
Finally, a poster with some sense!! (Score:3, Interesting)
From what I've read so far here, a number people who would normally be all excited about the government supporting open standards and open source turn ultra-luddite when the words "government" and "identity" come together!
Re:Okay, here's the poop (Score:2)
But integrate all government databases at all levels into one super authentication and data store? No thanks. I would far rather live with some inefficiency and extra expense than ever see that happen.
Another consideration is that it might not even work. Frank Herbert had a good story about a society that made itself as efficient as possible, until things were moving so fast that they started to disintegrate. They had to create a "Department of Sabatoge" to slow themselves down. I could easily see that happening with these super databases.
sPh
Re:MOD PARENT DOWN (Score:2, Insightful)
Here's the rub... (Score:4, Interesting)
But how "federated" are they thinking here? Federated as in 1803 USA, or federated as in 2003 USA? How centrallized will this whole thing be, and who has a say in who controls how much? Will the central database really keep only a bare minimum of information, allowing most of the data maintenance to be performed by the interested parties, or will it be federated in name only, with the central database controlling everything, giving third parties the ability to collect extraneous BS "if they want to?"
(Ironicly enough, involving the DoD may help keep things relatively decentrallized. They're not all that keen on single points of failure.)
DoD soldier information (Score:5, Interesting)
They were working for a while on smartcards for all military personnel, and that's actually gone pretty far along.
But they've probably learned that there's too much to stick on a smartcard, and you can't get good enough security to put confidential information on the smartcard that you give to 1.3 million people. Too many will lose them, and then you have problems.
So they want to have the records, and have them easily tied to individuals. And have them available in the different commands, on different servers scattered thoroughout the DoD command structure.
They are very interested in something like the Liberty Alliance, and making sure that they can use it for their purposes. Keeping this diverse array of information for 1.3 million people is just what this project is made for.
Seems good that the DoD became aware of it, and decided to participate. And I'm reassured that they didn't decide to just go with the Microsoft solution without considering the options. (Maybe they learned from the problems the Navy has been having with NMCI.)
China has this same problem (Score:4, Interesting)
There is a huge market for this overseas, representing some 1 billion peoples.
Re:China has this same problem (Score:1, Funny)
Re:China has this same problem (Score:1)
Re:China has this same problem (Score:1)
Double Plus Good newspeak (Score:1, Troll)
Freedom = Imprisonment
Life = Death
Liberty Alliance Project (Score:1, Funny)
Project Liberty and Privacy (Score:3, Informative)
Ask not what your government will do to you... (Score:4, Insightful)
The contingents from GSA and DoD participating in the Liberty ALliance are among the good guys. They believe in an open Internet and in open standards. They released their Certificate Arbitrator Module (CAM) [mitretek.org] under an open source license. They want to see the Internet work for everyone so it isn't hijacked for a few.
Re:Ask not what your government will do to you... (Score:1)
The way things are going, your statement should read "Ask not what your government will do to you, instead do damage to them on a debilitating degree so that you won't have to find out what they'd do to you...."
What a mess. (Score:1)
"But the quickest paths in outer space are all toll roads (it costs a lot of rocket fuel to use them), while you can ride the Interplanetary Superhighway almost for free. Gravity does the driving, so the system is really more like an elaborate set of Hot Wheels tracks. All you have to do is let go of the car at the right place."
Enough already! Hot wheels tracks, Interplanetary Superhighway, toll roads - unless this article was written for nickelodeon.com it's ridiculous, and even then kids would have to do the same thing I did, wade through the crap for the content.
Sorry, got a little frustrated.
Re:In the future (Score:1)
Re:In the future (Score:2, Funny)
Re:This is a good thing. (Score:1, Insightful)
Maybe that's just the lover of Liberty in me speaking, though.
Re:This is a good thing. (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait... Rosie O'Donnel has armed guards... Feinstein has a concealed carry permit... Brady bought her son a rifle... what was it with the lady heading up the Million Mom March ? It has nothing to do with making anything safer, geesh, more people die from prescription errors and drowning in swimming pools. It has to do with making only an elite being able to have them. Nice hypocritical, anti-freedom company you want to keep, AC.
"The people have no legitimate need for guns but the various police agencies should be very well armed." -- Yes, this has worked very well in England, Australia, and New Zealand.
Just one quick question - why is it that anti-freedom folks try to put personal responsibility upon inanimate objects?
Mod me down, bad karma can't get much worse.
Re:This is a good thing. (Score:2)
I don't mean to insert some facts into your little rant, but New Zealand's cops aren't armed for most of the time. I think (but I'm not 100% sure of it) that the same applies to the UK.
Re:This is a good thing. (Score:5, Insightful)
> The government needs to monitor the people to make
> sure they are obeying the law to prevent terrorism.
1) Monitoring an ordinary citizen's breaches of the law (downloading copyrighted media without permission/paying, speeding, and more serious crimes) is not going to prevent any terrorism, because most US citizens are not terrorists, but are rather the people you want to protect from terrorism.
2) Monitoring known terrorists (while meeting the requirements of the Fourth Amendment for those few who are US citizens) would help prevent terrorism. Pity the government, if it followed your advice, would not have the manpower to watch the terrorists if they were busy watching the citizens.
3) Most importantly, monitoring US citizens without warrants and such is against the Fourth Amendment, and therefore a crime. You don't want all those Revolutionary War heroes to have died in vain, do you?
> Of course this is all silly when they don't do the most
> common sense thing and ban the private ownership of
> guns.
Yeah, that would really help. Not only are guns not usually used in terrorism (they like bombs which private citizens do not own), but an armed citizen might be able to stop a terrorist before more people are hurt.
> The people have no legitimate need for guns but the
> various police agencies should be very well armed.
The people, not the police, are generally the ones present during a terrorist attack. All the arms of the police (who are very well armed, some in Florida with military hardware they have no training in how to use) are no good, if they are not present to stop an attack.
Anyway, the important thing is that the Second Amendment says that people have the right to bear arms.
You might want to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights again. The USA you purpose bears no resemblance to the the one defined by those documents.
Databases (government or things like the Liberty Alliance), monitoring, disarming and stripping away the rights of US citizens are not going to solve the problem of terrorism. To stop terrorism for good, you have to look for its source: hatred and anger toward US foreign policy.
It's pretty simple. Pull the troops out of Saudi Arabia (and any other place in the Middle East where they are not wanted), and quit showing favoritism toward Israel (be chummy with Israel, but be just as chummy with everyone else), and you will have taken away Al Qaeda's main recruitment issues. Invade Iraq, and stir up a hornets' nest of angry terrorists.
Heck, being fair, impartial, and not sticking our troops where they aren't welcome would do wonders for our image worldwide. As for preemptive invasion, the last one to pull that was Hitler invading Poland. Boy did his foreign policy land him in a mess of trouble!
"Lola, kindness is not enough, look for the reason of hatred and anger.
When you find and understand that, love becomes the strongest power
Belabera, "Mothra 3: King Ghidora Attacks"
Re:This is a good thing. (Score:1)
As for preemptive invasion, the last one to pull that was Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait. Boy did his foreign policy land him in a mess of trouble!
Re:This is a good thing. (Score:2)
> Correction:
> As for preemptive invasion, the last one to pull that was
> Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait.
Saddam Hussein was afraid Kuwait was going to attack him?
Note the word "preemptive". That is when you attack because you fear an attack. I don't think Saddam bothered using that as an excuse, but I do know Hitler's Nazis mentioned it at their trials as an excuse. That is also the pretense Bush is using to attack Iraq.
"The path of peace is yours to discover for eternity."
Japanese version of "Mothra" (1961)
Re:This is a good thing. (Score:1)
When has that ever happened? (Score:2)
Seriously, how often is a bomb stopped by an commoner with a gun? Heck, if you'd look at some of the IRA bombs in Northern Ireland, and you'll see bombs work against military outports that have both guns *and* training. Are you telling me Joe Sixpack will do better? By the time he's shooting he'll either be:
a) Blown away by the bomb already
b) Panicked when trying to fire his gun, and shot
c) Shot by the other terrorist behind him.
d) 9/11: Decompress plane at cruise altitude
e) Shoot the bomb too and set it off
f) Shoot the terrorist, but the bomb is timed and goes off anyway
Seriously, I've heard some decent arguments for having guns, but this is not one of them...
Kjella