Condoleezza and the Vulcans

Wikipedia:

"The Vulcans is a nickname used to refer to Republican Presidential candidate George W. Bush's foreign policy advisory team assembled to brief him prior to the 2000 U.S. presidential election."

Another one from Wikipedia:

"It was established in 'The Enterprise Incident' that, like all Vulcans, Spock never lies. In 'The Doomsday Machine' Spock states that 'Vulcans never bluff'. It could be argued that this is typical from someone who is bluffing, but this appears credible, since Vulcans never lie. In ' The Menagerie', however, Spock actually does lie. He tells Captain Kirk about a message sent to them from Star Base 11, ordering them to visit the now-disabled Captain Pike who is living in a special hospital there. They received no such order, as Kirk later discovers when they arrive. He later discusses this with Dr. McCoy, who refuses to acknowledge the possibility of Spock having lied. '...It's impossible, Jim; Spock is a Vulcan. He is utterly incapable of lying,' McCoy says. 'Yes,' Kirk replies. 'But he is also half-human. That human part of him is capable of lying.' This is one of the more prominent instances of Spock lying. He also lies to Starfleet in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country when the Enterprise defies orders to return to base. Spock, along with McCoy, lies to Kirk in 'The Tholian Web' about not seeing Kirk's taped final orders to the two. He later admits this to Kirk while they are sitting in a Vulcan detention cell in the non-canon novel, Avenger."

Star Trek as the base for foreign politics. Or how to use the power of an image of not being capable of lying to get things done the way you want them.

I love Wikipedia and I love quotes. Even without their context they sometimes can say something important. Looking for quotes from Condoleezza you will easily find next ones:

"We need a common enemy to unite us."

"But the truth of the matter is, we're an open society, we want to remain an open society, and there will continue to be vulnerability. That's why we have to meet the threats when they are not yet taking place on our territory and on our soil."

"Our policies toward Iraq simply are to protect the region and to protect Iraq's people and neighbors."

"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly Saddam can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

"We are at war, and our security as a nation depends on winning that war."

"We're in a new world. We're in a world in which the possibility of terrorism, married up with technology, could make us very, very sorry that we didn't act."

Doesn't it give you a feeling of safety that Condoleeza is always on her guard for us? The best one I have ever heared from her was the one of some weeks ago:

"This is not 1968 and the invasion of Czechoslovakia, where Russia can threaten its neighbors, occupy a capital, overthrow a government, and get away with it. Things have changed."

I am thinking of a list that could be made about US behaviour after 1968. But of course, only the Russians are bound to comply with the rules, Condoleezza's view on the protection of her people and their friends are not valid for Russians. Was it Sting who once wanted to tell the world that the Russians might love their children too?