According to the Financial Times of London, Bush intends to blame Iraq and then turn tail and run like a coward/bully chicken hawk would. Naturally, Bush will not take responsibility for his own morass making and in typical and predictable GOP fashion, he will play the blame game instead. I am all for getting out of Iraq NOW, but please Mr. President, at least have the decency and courage to take responsibility for the human catastrophe, carnage, mayhem and unparalleled debacle that you have visited upon the Middle East and on the U.S.
Who on earth appointed this monster W. to office in 2000 (the Supreme Court, thank you very much) and who rigged the election in Ohio (Blackwell and Diebold’s CEO ) to maintain W. in power in 2004? Surely these folks and all of their offspring, including all Bushes, Cheneys, Rumsfelds, Rices and every Congress person, including Democrats, who voted to declare war on Iraq, should be forced to serve in Iraq.
Make a sacrifice or two before asking average Jane and Joe America to step up.
No? Well, then, perhaps all of those mentioned above should be charged with... let's see...crimes against humanity... treason...... hmmmmm.... LS
Excerpts:
“You could call it ‘blame and run’, ” said Zbigniew Bzrezinski, a former national security adviser now at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. “It is based on a pervasive illusion that there is such a thing as an Iraqi government. The more we blame it for doing things it cannot do, the more impotent it will become. ‘Blame and run’ is self-fulfilling.”
Strobe Talbott, head of the bipartisan Brookings Institution, agrees. In a speech last week he criticised the view that Baghdad could be pressed to make changes such as disarming the sectarian militias by threatening to withhold military, political or economic aid. The ISG report states that Baghdad must prove that it “deserves” future aid.
“The logic of that pressure tactic — that is, why it should work with the Iraqis — is not clear, since most of them want us out [of Iraq],” said Mr Talbott. “The logic on our own side, however, is very clear indeed: having pre-emptively invaded their country, let’s pre-emptively blame them for the mess we’ve made of it.”
The breadth of support for such a line is striking. In a leaked memo last week, Donald Rumsfeld, the outgoing defence secretary, said the Iraqis needed “to pull their socks up”.
CUT AND RUN THEN BLAME IRAQ
BUSH DOES NOT CARE WHAT 75% OF AMERICANS WANT BUT HE AND CHENEY WILL HEED SAUDI ARABIA'S ADVICE.
I read the chilling piece, posted below, written on the New York Times.com concerning Saudi Arabia and how it will likely support Iraqi Sunnis if the U.S. withdraws from Iraq. This is just lovely. Saudi Arabia will support the Sunnis and Iran will support the Shiites. Iran would love to blow Israel off of the planet. Israel openly admitted it has nuclear weapons. Of course everyone in the world knows this but an open admission of such could mean Israel is locked and loaded. No wonder the ISG committee members are so somber and Bush I is sobbing. What a potentially horrible nightmare is in the making, thanks to W., the neonuts and a clueless U.S. mainstream media. Any Kool-Aid left to transport us to an alternate reality? LS.
Excerpts:
The Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, who told his staff on Monday that he was resigning his post, recently fired Nawaf Obaid, a consultant who wrote an opinion piece in The Washington Post two weeks ago contending that “one of the first consequences” of an American pullout of Iraq would “be massive Saudi intervention to stop Iranian-backed Shiite militias from butchering Iraqi Sunnis.”
Mr. Obaid also suggested that Saudi Arabia could cut world oil prices in half by raising its production, a move that he said “would be devastating to Iran, which is facing economic difficulties even with today’s high oil prices.” The Saudi government disavowed Mr. Obaid’s column, and Prince Turki canceled his contract.
But Arab diplomats said Tuesday that Mr. Obaid’s column reflected the view of the Saudi government, which has made clear its opposition to an American pullout from Iraq.
In a speech in Philadelphia last week, Prince Turki reiterated the Saudi position against an American withdrawal from Iraq. “Just picking up and leaving is going to create a huge vacuum,” he told the World Affairs Council. “The U.S. must underline its support for the Maliki government because there is no other game in town.”
Prince Turki said Saudi Arabia did not want Iraq to fracture along ethnic or religious lines. On Monday a group of prominent Saudi clerics called on Sunni Muslims around the world to mobilize against Shiites in Iraq. The statement called the “murder, torture and displacement of Sunnis” an “outrage.”
SAUDIA ARABIA SAYS IT MAY BACK IRAQI SUNNIS IF U.S. WITHDRAWS
BUSH'S DELAY IN CHANGING THE POLICY IN IRAQ UPSETS PRINCIPALED JOURNALISTS.
The article below is a very impressive and sobering editorial written by the New York Times' editors today. LS
Excerpts:
We are more than eager for this White House to finally get something right on Iraq. But we find it chilling to imagine that Mr. Bush and his advisers have only now begun a full policy review, months after Iraq plunged into civil war and years after experts began warning that the administration’s strategy was not working.
We would like to believe that the reason for delay is that some of Mr. Bush’s advisers have come up with a sensible change in course and they are now trying to persuade the president to take it. Or that behind the scenes Mr. Bush is already strong-arming Iraq’s leaders to rein in the sectarian militias and begin long-delayed national reconciliation talks.
We fear that a more likely explanation is that the president’s ever-divided policy advisers are still wrangling over the most basic decisions, while his political handlers are waiting for public enthusiasm for the Baker report to flag before Mr. Bush tries to explain why he won’t follow through on some of the report’s most important and reasonable suggestions — like imposing a timetable on Iraqi leaders to make political compromises or face a withdrawal of American support. Or trying to persuade Iran and Syria to cease their meddling.
"WITHOUT DELIBERATE SPEED"
"WHO CARES WHAT YOU THINK?"
This is a great anthology of articles put together by Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post on Bush's delay in changing policy in Iraq LS
"WHO CARES WHAT YOU THINK?"
"THE BUBBLE BOY IN THE OVAL OFFICE"
From the L.A. Times. Yet another sobering and disturbing revelation on the quintessential spoiled brat and narcissistic child who is simultaneously running and ruining our nation. Even Daddy’s best buddies cannot stop him. Where is Mother Bush when we need her the most? In total denial, no doubt.. Let us all eat poisoned cake. LS
"THE BUBBLE BOY IN THE OVAL OFFICE"
No comments:
Post a Comment