Dec 08 2006

The Fruity Jim Baker

Published by at 3:29 pm under All General Discussions

I don’t have a link but Jim Baker said the President shouldn’t treat his Iraq Surrender Group’s (H/T Rush Limbaugh) Surrender Plan as a “fruit salad”. Since it was the product of a bunch of fruit cakes, I can not for the life of me understand why Baker would think Bush wasn’t taking his team of Fruit Loops more seriously. The surrender plan is nothing more than a spineless Congress’ lame attempt to dodge the issue of our times in 2008. It is no coincidence the plan calls for our departure from Iraq before the fall campaigns get serious. Why do you think Congress paid for this figleaf? Baker should stop with the sour grapes – he is not President. Thankfully Bush is.

19 responses so far

19 Responses to “The Fruity Jim Baker”

  1. Terrye says:


    I don’t really like this ISG myself but it does not call for surrender nor does it call for a complete pullout. The pullout is contingent on certain conditions on the ground being met, which is not so different from what a lot of people have been saying for some time. In fact in some ways this could be useful to Bush because it most certainly does not call for what Murtha wants.

    I think tying together Iraq and Israel is a waste of time and I doubt that Iran is any mood to be helpful. But the report also does mention the use of “disincitives” with Iran which could be interesting considering that a disincitive could be something like the US funding anti mullah factions. But over all the report can actually work to Bush’s advantage because it does not call for an immediate drawdown of troops and it does call for more training of Iraqis…so it is one of those things where no one really gets what they want. I am more interested in the Pentagon report coming out and I understand that after that Bush will be making an address to the country about Iraq.

    But to categorize the ISG as a surrender or to say that it calls for the unilateral withdrawal of all American troops by a set date no matter what is not really true.

  2. Terrye says:

    And so far a good deal of people in Congress, Democrat and Republican are not embracing this thing so it is also not entirely true to say that Congress is looking to the report to dodge anything. The truth is most Americans want to see something soon that looks like we are turning a corner. I don’t think they really expect a complete victory overnight but they do want good news. People get impatient and nervous when all they hear is doom and gloom. That is just human nature.

    I think people have over reacted to the report and made it a bigger deal than it is.

    So far Bush is not giving any indication that he will do anything anyone in the ISG tells him to do.

  3. Ken says:

    So Strata beleives Bush should defy the wish of 70% of the American people even though by so defying, Strata also concedes Bush has no short-term plan for “victory” in the third year of a quagmire. Strata effectively is vowing Bush should overtly defy,–on a long-term basis-, –the will of the people, yet Strata never fails to emphasize his goal of bringing “democracy,” to Iraqis.


    “People get impatient and nervous when all they hear is doom and gloom. ”

    Yes,and as the Report mentions, the violence in Iraq is being seriously underreported. Why maybe 650,000 unnecessary victims due to Bush’s invasion is underreporting also.
    Finally, Terrye, it is so like you to ignore the Report’s overt mention of the necessity of reigning in Israel and for you to chutzpah instead with a dubious claim of the Report hinting at mullah-overthrow.
    No realist you.

  4. Terrye says:

    It is so like me Ken? And it is so like you to blame everything on Israel and there is nothing in that report that says aything about 650,000 people being killed. Not even close.

    It also says that just pulling out would be a disaster, but they are just brown people so Ken the American Firster and nazi sympathizer could care less.

  5. For Enforcement says:

    Yes, that’s what J. Baker said, don’t treat it like a fruit salad and just pick out the parts you like, must take it all. Now there were 79 items in there and you know how many of them were Pres Bush’s? 0….. So they don’t even think he’s entitled to either add an item or deduct an item. All or none. He needs to tell them to take a long walk on a short pier.
    I do agree with Terrye that there is not a call to surrender without conditions in the plan.
    But if Pres Bush HAD to follow all of the 79 items, he should at least be allowed to add one step and it should be number 1. And that would be to send over a major shipment of white flags.
    Most important is our communicating with Syria and Iran. Tell them to keep the hell out of it, or they will be next.
    Now, That’s a Plan.

    There are some good ideas on the list, but there are some that are deadly. I notice there were no Generals on the committee. Well here’s my plan. Put together a panel of about 15 Active duty Generals and Tommy Franks. Require them to review General Patton’s theories on fighting warfare. Then give Pres Bush their plan for unconditional VICTORY within 6 months. Then Pres Bush should sign on to that plan and give them the go ahead.

  6. Terrye says:


    I think that General Pace is doing something like that.. Dafydd at Big Lizards did a couple of posts on the report. I am glad he read the damn thing so I don’t have to.

    It is a mixed bag, which I think was the intent all along.

  7. Ken says:

    A little defensive aren’t we, TERRYE? It’s typical of just about any American who supports the US “political class” these days. Particular those that lean to the “neo-conservative.”

    Did I blame “everything” on Israel….or are you a little edgy that
    Israel might be forced to comply with UN edicts in the same manner as Iraq was?

    And the 650,000 figure was the Johns Hopkins study estimate. If one interpolates the Report’s claim that violence is seriously underreported in Iraq, then one can easily tack on to that unfortunate total, which the US is responsible for under the terms of Geneva.

  8. For Enforcement says:

    Coffin sales have been in the 100,000 to 125,000 range.

  9. For Enforcement says:

    Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq
    Min 49,750

    Max 55,164

    As of Dec 1, 2006

  10. For Enforcement says:

    A close reading of the ISG report would lead anyone that wants to win in Iraq to say that there is not one redeeming item in the whole damn report. Not one. I agree fully with AJ’s comments about fruity and fruit cakes and fruit loops. All it calls for is giving up in Iraq and giving up territory in Israel. The word Israel has no place in the report. None.
    I think Pres Bush has analyzed it very well and has effectively been put into file 13.

    Thank God we have Pres Bush in office. We have hope for 2 more years.

  11. Terrye says:

    Well actually Enforcement there are a lot of things in the report that are very much like some of the things Bush talks about, such as training up the Iraqis…however, they will not talk about something like winning. That was never their purpose.

  12. Terrye says:


    A little psychotic aren’t we? That is typical of illiterate anti semites.

  13. Barbara says:

    All these guys on the ISG are anti war. They seem to think diplomacy would work on the jihadist. What was it one of the jihadist said ” We don’t want you to appease us, we want to eliminate you”. How in the world are you going to negotiate with people like that. They will demand this and after you give it to them, they will demand that. It will never end. Diplomacy sometimes works with reasonable people, but these people are far from reasonable.

    The SDG is a disaster just like the 911 Commission. Whenever anybody says this is bipartisan they really mean the republican folded again. That is the only way bipartisanship is possible.
    These guys on the ISG need to fold their tents and slink slowly off into the night never to be heard of again. They have become totally irrelevant.

  14. Ken says:

    You fellaheen are in for a long slog to defeat and when it consummates formally you can blame your childish predisposition
    to that escapist “American optimism.”

    For Enforcement

    Have you ever defined what you mean by “victory?” If it is like
    the more than occasional idiosyncratic definitions of words on this site eg Strata’s insistence a few months back that “war” is the wrong
    nomenclature for Iraqi events ongoing….then I’ll be amused.
    Regardless, even the minimalist definition you’re likely to
    proffer is unobtainable. And Iraqis oft do not report their
    losses as the John Hopkins report outlines.

    And Israel returning the West Bank and Samaria, among a broader program,is THE crux of Middle East peace, inclusive of Iraq,
    according to every Arab leader, but they don’t count in
    your fantasy world.


    Your Stalinesque attempt at pathologizing political dissent
    befits you. And you omitted the hyphen in anti-semite,
    envious one.

  15. For Enforcement says:

    Terrye, have you observed that if you wrote a comment agreeing 100% with ‘UNNAMED’ that he would pick it apart and disagree with it.
    Did you see the comment on the other thread where I clearly stated I made up the polls, but stated he would read them and believe that i meant them and disagree. He did.

  16. For Enforcement says:

    This is just to humor you.
    Define Victory
    Definition number one. For Patriotic Americans
    To acheive our goals in Iraq.

    Definition number two. For Dems, Libs, Progressives and “unnamed”
    To get the white flags there in time.

  17. Ken says:,0,3255218.story?coll=la-headlines-world

    and this is to humor you: America LOST the war in 2003.
    the victor is declared above.

  18. Ken says:

    and For Enforcement, Strata and the dreamers on this site who believe otherwise take note; THE IRAQ SYNDROME HAS STRUCK!