Dec 06 2006
ISG A Wasted Punt
The Iraq Survey Group has come out and demonstrated their total incompetence and futility. Instead of providing a plan to win in Iraq (which we are not winning or losing, still battling) they have decided the politicians would best be served if they did not have to deal with Iraq during the next election cycle. They propose a date certain to give up. Now Al Qaeda knows how long they need to hold on and our Iraqi allies know the day they will be slaughtered in the streets by Al Qaeda. No concern for our military or what the future would bring if Al Qaeda took over Iraq. No concern for all those brave Iraqis, the vast majority, that have risked their lives and died to gain a democracy. Just a thinnly vieled CYA for all those knocked-kneed Pols who hate to be confronted with tough issues while they serenade us with all their virtues and grand successes during the campaign season. Washington DC is officially broken folks. All they can do is cover those wide bottoms of theirs and try to cling to their cushy little Congressional seats. That is why the date was picked folks – our elections and their discomfort. Congress paid for this report so they have enormous say on what is in it (trust me, this group was not independent from Congress at all). Why not surrender now? Politically too damaging. Now our fearless Congress has two years to explain why they cannot be bothered with Iraq. Pathetic. Thank goodness Bush is not going to fold or run. I suspect his trashbin is overflowing with this ridiculous cover up for political cowards.
Enforcement:
CArol and I had this discussion over at another blog. It seems she is under the impression that Bush has to get her approval before replacing the Secretary of Defence. I thought he served at the pleasure of the President but it seems he serves at the pleasure of Carol. Who knew?
I stopped reading her long covuluted paranoid posts some time ago but it is her contention that Bush made it impossible for Olmert to destroy Hezbellah {or something} and that he has betrayed and abandoned Israel by allowing Condi {hiss boo} to suck up to the French. Or something.
And then when Bush fired Rumsfeld and did not order that Baker be shot for showing his face in Washington that was considered proof positive that Bush is responsible for all the ills of the ME and planet earth.
Never mind the decades of failed initiatives and wars that came before, it is all Condi and George’s fault.
In truth a lot of people wanted Rumsfeld gone and from what I have heard he was himself something of a realist. I guess it depends on how we defing realism. Rumsfeld realism is good, Baker realism is bad.
What I find interesting is that Ken can come up with the idea that the Bush administration is controlled by the Zionists and Carol can come up with the idea that Bush has abandoned Israel using the same evidence and the same paranoid thinking.
Extremes meet again.
What I would like to know is how anyone can say that Bush abandoned Israel when it was Clinton who let Arafat sleep in the White House?
As for the ISG I did hear Baker say that a withdrawal of American forces would be disastrous. So my guess is this will be a cover for the Democrats to excuse not withdrawing, not yet anyway.
In fact I read somewhere that Reyes {D} supports a troop increase. I suppose we will have to wait and see what if anything it means.
The problem with all of this is with the “fence sitters” in Iraq who haven’t been joining the insurgents or the government and have just been waiting to see who gets the upper hand. With all this talk coming out of Washington, it seems that the insurgents might now be able to use the “see, we are winning!” recruiting slogan to get people onto the “winning” side.
All of this makes it clearly obvious that Washington isn’t serious about Iraq.
Rural people are always more agreeable.
In fact Dickens hated Americans. The resentment toward Americans is not new. I remember the huge demonstrations in Europe when Reagan was president and they thought he was going to start a nuclear war. They were larger than the ones before the Iraq War.
Yeah, they don’t like us but when there is an earthquake or tsunami or a famine or a pandemic it is the United States that is expected to expend the resources necessary to come to the rescue. They are like bad children who does not like the way Dad makes his money but damn well expect to be included in the Will.
Crosspatch:
I don’t know if that is really true or not. Most people will admit that it would be disastrous if we lost in Iraq, but then again they want to bitch about it and just let Bush do the heavy lifting.
No, Terrye, Blogs don’t do “discussions.” Yes, I’ve seen your points of view. But they are not mine.
As to Rumsfeld, he’s doing okay speaking for himself. There’s an excellent piece out there, taken from his remarks published in today’s LA Times, that expresses his views. With TOP OF THE LINE, suggestions. And, bottom of the line, also.
As to the dems selected to serve with Baker, and his Iraqi study group, none of them are anything more than mouthpieces for the arabs.
Michigan is a state, like a few others, well known for sending arab-lovers to congress. Nowhere near the majority of 435 distributed seats.
And, yes. Israel has friends in Congress. Much more so than in the White House.
People forget, that during Gulf War One, Bush #41 guaranteed Israel, if she cooperated, that he would sign off on loan guarantees. Only thing, was. She wasn’t allowed to respond to Saddam’s scud attacks.
Then? Bush #41 cancelled the loan guarantees, with the excuse Israel would use them on “settlements.”
No country, today, works without “profiles” that are read by prime ministers; when they go out to do their diplomatic pants dancing.
And, while lots of you want to believe James Baker is a democrat; and taking “orders” from Harry Reid. Why bless you. I needed a good laugh, today.
In Iraq, the Saudis met their match. Because when the Saudis funded the sunni terror, it was supposed to “Roll up” Iraq, under American military auspices; and hand the country over to the Saudi iron fist.
No matter what else lies ahead, the saudis are finally on the ropes.
And, James Baker is just spinning.
Blame the democrats all ya want. The 2000 choice that got into the white house, has probably damaged the GOP worse than Warren Harding.
And, since Americans, at the ballot box, in seven states, listened to their senators running for elections, before voting. It seems apparent that the democrats found supporters. And, the GOP didn’t. Can’t go to the supreme court now, and ask for a recount, either.
If the GOP becomes the incredibly shrinking party; inspite of all the “compassionate conservatives,” hue-ing and crying. You’re still faced with an uphill battle, come January 2007.
The old name calling? A lot of good it did ya when ya shoulted out RINO. So go, ahead. Name-calling’s your forte.
And, by the way, Terrye, you have a very small mind if you can’t conceive of the fact that LOTS OF PEOPLE CLICK ON TO READ COMMENTS, without leaving any. And, this isn’t “your” blog, either.
Welcome to what is a Free Country.
Macker, so true, especially in France and Italy and also in Britain.
You know, thinking about it, the rural people (and I just mean in general) in America are more the same way. Patriotic, love America and in France (and Europe in general) are really thankful that their countries got saved and are thankful to the USA for it. I guess it’s the “blue states” over there and over here that hate America.
Terrye, thanks for that info on Carol H. I know I had a hard time trying to follow her convoluted rambling.
and: “I remember the huge demonstrations in Europe when Reagan was president and they thought he was going to start a nuclear war. ”
And the irony of it, When JFK was in the same position as Reagan and Europe thought he was going to start a nuclear war, they loved him. Not for the reason he was going to start a war, but because he stood up to the Soviets.
That last paragraph about famines and tsunami’s, I made that same point to Ken when he was making the point about everyone hating America, who they would call on when their Butts got in trouble.
I read the Executive summary of the ISG and I don’t find any date certain for anything. I read some guidelines for some things, but what I see clearly is they state unequivocally that it would be a disaster for the US to lose in Iraq.
They know it, Pres Bush knows it. We will be protected for two more years anyhow.
AJ, not trying to argue the point, but I didn’t see the ‘date certain’ either in the executive summary or in the linked article in the WaPo.
I don’t like anything about the ISG, especially the fact that there is such a thing, but it does seem in the exec summary that they do understand the situation. I didn’t read the ‘full report’. It may just be a matter of interpretation.
I believe Pres Bush understands the situation better than most and will look out for the folks.
George W. Bush will do what HE thinks is right. He get ALL the intel and all the advice. He is intent upon keeping us safe which means that we MUST have Iraq become a stable democracy.
Exactly what elected positions do any on this stupid Iraq committee hold? THEY ARE IRRELEVENT.
THERE IS ONLY ONE COMMANDER IN CHIEF.
And for the record: which of these former commanders-in-chief would you want protecting America today?
JFK
LBJ
J. CARTER
W.J.CLINTON
The democrats do not know how to protect America. Period. They, along with their media cohorts have aided and abetted the enemy bordering on high treason.
Which one would I want,
Either GW Washington or
H S Truman
From Taranto at Best of Web:
The recommendations of the Iraq Study Group are out, and those who are eager for a quick American defeat will be disappointed. The full report is here, and the Associated Press summarizes the findings:
President Bush’s policy in Iraq “is not working,” a high-level commission said Wednesday in a blunt, bleak assessment that urged an immediate diplomatic attempt to stabilize the country and allow withdrawal of most combat troops by early 2008. . . .
“Military priorities must change,” the report said, toward a goal of training, equipping and advising Iraqi forces. “We should seek to complete the training and equipping mission by the end of the first quarter of 2008.”
The commission recommended the number of U.S. troops embedded to train Iraqis should increase dramatically, from 3,000-4,000 currently to 10,000-20,000. Commission member William Perry, defense secretary in the Clinton administration, said those could be drawn from combat brigades already in Iraq.
Then, by early 2008, combat troops could begin to leave the country.
More than a year ago, Rep. John Murtha caused a stir when he said America should “immediately redeploy,” though he later claimed this wasn’t what he meant (another botched joke?). The ISG’s recommendation is much more moderate: a partial withdrawal, beginning more than a year from now, contingent on the success of efforts to train Iraqi forces. It seems like a plausible approach.
The ISG Report Is In…
This is why I call the Baker boys psuedorealists and why the media doesn’t quite get it….
Terrye, I ment fence sitters in Iraq, not here.
The absolute guaranteed way to lose a war is to continue telling your opponent that they are winning and to tell your troops and your allies that you are losing. War is 90% psychological these days because we dare not use our full force. Our media decides these days who wins a war. I just hope the idiots at the Times refuse to pray 5 times a day and are the first in line to get their heads chopped off.
Carol_H’s incoherent ramblings should come with a warning — read at your own risk, headaches and other side effects common.
Our country and the world are a far better place for our taking down Saddam’s thugocracy. Yeah, it’s a tough slog right now, but it’s not as bad as all the doomsayers. Iraq is a key battle in the global war on terror. Let’s keep the big picture perspective and forge ahead. Unfortunately, we also have to contend with the anti-Bush and anti-military MSM and the liberal lefty peaceniks.
Let me be optimistic on the ISG report:
1. It provides political cover – and while that may look like a bad thing, it actually is a good thing. It defuses the Dems – who can now ignore Iraq instead of having hearing after hearing. Thus condoning in reality a stay the course lite plan after all.
2. A deadline didn’t make much sense a year ago when the Iraqi government looked like it could do something. Now, they might need some pushing and a deadline might concentrate some minds. Plus, deadlines can always be changed. A cooling of period where the militias and insurgents “wait” for us to leave might also be very useful on its own right.
3. The focus on the training of the Iraqis is the right one – we were doing that anyways and it should be accelerated. So, when do we push the fledging Iraqis out of the nest to see if they can fly? Well, every mother is nervous, but maybe we shouldn’t be. Many third word armies deal with long running insurgencies pretty well.
4. Al Qaeda in Iraq is not going to win. The majority of people in Iraq hate them and the Anbar tribes are fighting them. This is the least of our worries in terms of meltdown scenarios. The civil war or Iranian capture of Iraq are much more serious. I would guess we will keep units dedicated to killing those folks off the withdrawl lists.
5. Talking with Iran and Syria – who knows? This is the weakest part of the ISG, but we already offered talks to Iran about nukes. And while often times these talks end up being sweet nothings, they do serve a purpose of denying the Left the ” if only we’d talk” fantasy critique. Personally they will probably amount to the Nork talks, i.e. talks about talks. In any case, talk IS cheap, and we aren’t promising anything but talks at this point. We should merely follow the Nork/Iran diplomatic strategy which has been so successful.
Now this part is more speculative: Selling Lebanon out will be much harder than it sounds, and probably result in a nice backlash among Lebanese and world opinion that ends up ixnaying any such plans. Remember if America is FOR something, most likely Europe and the Left will oppose it vigorously. So let’s use that to our advantage.
Okay, that’s just some thoughts.
If the nut job in Iran has his way the NYT and other media outfits in NYC won’t have anything to say. NYC will be an ash heap and all these people will be dead. NYC and Washington, DC will be their first targets.
I used to enjoy Carol_Herman’s posts but she has been reading books written by people on the other side and she has been brainwashed. She said herself she was reading Woodward’s newest book and was getting a lot of information from it. What she is getting is a bunch of lies because that bunch don’t know anything else. Carol is very angry with Bush for some reason.
Okay, let’s ask her why,
Carol H. why are you very angry with Pres Bush.
Don” t blow smoke, plain and simple
Anyone who reads Woodward’s books (especially, State of Denial) as gospel is, well, naive to start with. Frankly, her (CH) jittery meanderings are annoying, not fun.
Strata
Reality in the form of Webb/Allen caught up with you; reality in the form of Bush’s willing or forced retreat will catch up with you.
Even you, who says “we are not winning or losing” when the political goals –of implanting a pro-American, pro-Israeli pseudo-democracy, sans Shariah law…are already lost.
Oh, and the al Qaeda taking over Iraq bit? That went out sometime
in late 2004 as an effective lie. You drive a Yugo?
Pardon, selling one?