Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Morass
Preznit Bush meets with Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki in Jordan today because it's too dangerous for Bush to go to Iraq.
The NY Times reports that National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley told Bush in a November 8th memo that he has serious doubts that Prime Minister Maliki has the political strength or wherewithal to put a stop to sectarian violence in Iraq because he is too tied to his Shiite powerbase. The key parts of the article, via Reuters:
The Washington Post says that the tone in Washington has begun to shift as American lawmakers and administration officials have begun to blame Iraqis wholly for the mess in Iraq. Iraqis are not doing enough, Iraqis are too corrupt, Iraqis are too fractured politically, etc.
There is no blame aimed at war supporters or war architects who lacked the foresight to see these problems beforehand, however.
Finally, John Burns and Kirk Semple write in the NY Times that as the violence has gotten worse in Iraq and as conditions have deteriorated, the Americans have less and less sway and influence over the Iraqis, so when the preznit meets with Maliki today to urge him to put a stop to the sectarian violence, the chances for success are about as good as they are for John Kerry to win the White House in 2008.
What a mess. And yet, the preznit will most likely reject any proposals from the Baker-Hamilton Commission that call for meaningful change in official war policy. So you can forget talks with Syria and Iran, you can forget partial withdrawal of U.S. troops, you can forget Bush making any meaningful change in policy that might alter the current "Stand and Bleed" policy that has made Iraq so much more dangerous now.
It's a morass. And King Delusion is the "Decider" who has decided nothing is going to change.
The NY Times reports that National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley told Bush in a November 8th memo that he has serious doubts that Prime Minister Maliki has the political strength or wherewithal to put a stop to sectarian violence in Iraq because he is too tied to his Shiite powerbase. The key parts of the article, via Reuters:
The Times said the five-page document was based in part on a meeting between Hadley and al-Maliki that took place in Iraq on Oct. 30.
The memo said al-Maliki receives “undoubtedly skewed” information from a small circle of advisers from the Shiite Dawa Party.
“His intentions seem good when he talks with Americans, and sensitive reporting suggests he is trying to stand up to the Shia hierarchy and force positive change,” the memo said.
“But the reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests al-Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into actions.”
The Washington Post says that the tone in Washington has begun to shift as American lawmakers and administration officials have begun to blame Iraqis wholly for the mess in Iraq. Iraqis are not doing enough, Iraqis are too corrupt, Iraqis are too fractured politically, etc.
There is no blame aimed at war supporters or war architects who lacked the foresight to see these problems beforehand, however.
Finally, John Burns and Kirk Semple write in the NY Times that as the violence has gotten worse in Iraq and as conditions have deteriorated, the Americans have less and less sway and influence over the Iraqis, so when the preznit meets with Maliki today to urge him to put a stop to the sectarian violence, the chances for success are about as good as they are for John Kerry to win the White House in 2008.
What a mess. And yet, the preznit will most likely reject any proposals from the Baker-Hamilton Commission that call for meaningful change in official war policy. So you can forget talks with Syria and Iran, you can forget partial withdrawal of U.S. troops, you can forget Bush making any meaningful change in policy that might alter the current "Stand and Bleed" policy that has made Iraq so much more dangerous now.
It's a morass. And King Delusion is the "Decider" who has decided nothing is going to change.
Comments:
<< Home
...the preznit will most likely reject any proposals from the Baker-Hamilton Commission that call for meaningful change in official war policy.
Damn I love having more of my tax dollars wasted. If not to implement the recommendations, then what was the panel convened for? To come back and say, "W's approach is...okey-dokey!"?
Damn I love having more of my tax dollars wasted. If not to implement the recommendations, then what was the panel convened for? To come back and say, "W's approach is...okey-dokey!"?
# posted by 
: 1:29 PM
: 1:29 PM
reality, your article is titled:
"Morass
Preznit Bush meets with Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki in Jordan today because it's too dangerous for Bush to go to Iraq."
Iraq may be a dangerous place. But it's a lot more dangerous for Iraqis caught up in the fighting and crossfire between the sunnis and the shiites.
I have no doubt that if Bush were to announce plans to meet Maliki in Iraq, a wave of killings would occur during his stay.
The added danger wouldn't put Bush in any great risk, but you can bet both the sunnis and the shiites would demonstrate their killing skills if Bush were there instead of Jordan, which is yet another muslim country of doubtful loyalty to the US.
"Morass
Preznit Bush meets with Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki in Jordan today because it's too dangerous for Bush to go to Iraq."
Iraq may be a dangerous place. But it's a lot more dangerous for Iraqis caught up in the fighting and crossfire between the sunnis and the shiites.
I have no doubt that if Bush were to announce plans to meet Maliki in Iraq, a wave of killings would occur during his stay.
The added danger wouldn't put Bush in any great risk, but you can bet both the sunnis and the shiites would demonstrate their killing skills if Bush were there instead of Jordan, which is yet another muslim country of doubtful loyalty to the US.
Hey - the jokes on Bush cuz' Maliki made him travel half way around the world and then stood him up!
kvatch, you're exactly right about the panel. I think it was a last ditch effort by the Bush family to rescue Little Georgie from his own stupidity, but it seems like it is going to fail.
kvatch, you're exactly right about the panel. I think it was a last ditch effort by the Bush family to rescue Little Georgie from his own stupidity, but it seems like it is going to fail.
"Jordan, which is yet another Muslim country of doubtful loyalty to the U.S."
No Slappz. You may wish to withdraw your cranium from your fundament and take a breath of air.
1. The United States has no greater Muslim ally in the mideast than Jordan. If you knew anything about its king and his policies, that would be evident to you.
2. Although we are allies, there is no reason why Jordan should act in its own best interests if U.S. policy is contrary to those interests.
No Slappz. You may wish to withdraw your cranium from your fundament and take a breath of air.
1. The United States has no greater Muslim ally in the mideast than Jordan. If you knew anything about its king and his policies, that would be evident to you.
2. Although we are allies, there is no reason why Jordan should act in its own best interests if U.S. policy is contrary to those interests.
# posted by : 12:54 PM
: 12:54 PM
loop garoo, you wrote:
"No Slappz. You may wish to withdraw your cranium from your fundament and take a breath of air."
I've been breathing nothing but the pure air of middle east facts for many years.
YOu wrote:
"1. The United States has no greater Muslim ally in the mideast than Jordan."
That's about like saying the US has no greater ally among the world of the mafia than John Gotti's crew.
You stated:
"If you knew anything about its king and his policies, that would be evident to you."
The current king (isn't that absurd enough? A king?! In the 21st century?!) has a brother named Ghazi. Ghazi was a client of mine in the late 1980s. Thus, I've got some insight into the royal family of Jordan.
You wrote:
"2. Although we are allies, there is no reason why Jordan should act in its own best interests if U.S. policy is contrary to those interests."
Let me know when Jordan becomes an open society safe for Jews and Christians. The fact that the dust-pile of Jordan benefits from its alliance with the US says nothing about the sentiments of the residents, who are infected with the same anti-western nonsense that swamps the brains of the millions and millions of other uneducated muslims broiling in the middle eastern sun.
"No Slappz. You may wish to withdraw your cranium from your fundament and take a breath of air."
I've been breathing nothing but the pure air of middle east facts for many years.
YOu wrote:
"1. The United States has no greater Muslim ally in the mideast than Jordan."
That's about like saying the US has no greater ally among the world of the mafia than John Gotti's crew.
You stated:
"If you knew anything about its king and his policies, that would be evident to you."
The current king (isn't that absurd enough? A king?! In the 21st century?!) has a brother named Ghazi. Ghazi was a client of mine in the late 1980s. Thus, I've got some insight into the royal family of Jordan.
You wrote:
"2. Although we are allies, there is no reason why Jordan should act in its own best interests if U.S. policy is contrary to those interests."
Let me know when Jordan becomes an open society safe for Jews and Christians. The fact that the dust-pile of Jordan benefits from its alliance with the US says nothing about the sentiments of the residents, who are infected with the same anti-western nonsense that swamps the brains of the millions and millions of other uneducated muslims broiling in the middle eastern sun.
Yo. No Slappz. Something happened, I think, to my response here. I refer yo to my last for 11.28 which did make it.
Also. Ghazi is the son of Prince Muhammed, the brother of King Hussein, and therefore is King Abdullah's cousin, not his brother.
Post a Comment
Also. Ghazi is the son of Prince Muhammed, the brother of King Hussein, and therefore is King Abdullah's cousin, not his brother.
# posted by : 3:08 PM
: 3:08 PM << Home
