Author Topic: Can you imagine how humiliating it will be for Bush to ask Iran & Syria for help  (Read 5677 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mucho

  • Guest
I guess it is better than putting Saddam back in power! LMFAO!  :D


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-planb16oct16,0,2315959,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines
THE CONFLICT IN IRAQ

Panel to Seek Change on Iraq
A commission backed by Bush has agreed that 'stay the course' is not working, its leader says. A phased withdrawal is one option on the table.
By Doyle McManus
Times Staff Writer

October 16, 2006

WASHINGTON — A commission backed by President Bush that is exploring U.S. options in Iraq intends to propose significant changes in the administration's strategy by early next year, members say.

Two options under consideration would represent reversals of U.S. policy: withdrawing American troops in phases, and bringing neighboring Iran and Syria into a joint effort to stop the fighting.

While it weighs alternatives, the 10-member commission headed by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III has agreed on one principle.

"It's not going to be 'stay the course,' " one participant said. "The bottom line is, [current U.S. policy] isn't working…. There's got to be another way."

If the panel recommends overhauling Bush's approach to Iraq, it could give a boost not only to critics of current policy but also to officials in the administration who have argued for broad changes.

"There'll probably be some things in our report that the administration might not like," Baker said in a television interview last week.

It's unclear how willing Bush is to change his strategy, which focuses on improving security in Baghdad, training Iraqi security forces and pressing the Iraqi government to forge a political agreement among warring factions.

Progress on all those fronts has been slow, and Bush last week said he was open to ideas.

"My attitude is: Don't do what you're doing if it's not working — change," Bush said at a news conference.

When the panel was formed in March, some administration officials hoped it would produce a bipartisan endorsement of existing policy. But as sectarian violence in Iraq has worsened, more Republicans in Congress — and privately some administration officials — have become receptive to alternatives.

The Baker panel, called the Iraq Study Group, was formed in response to a proposal by members of Congress. Nevertheless, Baker sought — and won — Bush's endorsement.

Other members include former Rep. Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.), who also served as co-chairman of the commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks; retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor; former Rep. Leon E. Panetta, a California Democrat who was President Clinton's chief of staff; and former CIA Director Robert M. Gates.

In its most recent closed-door meetings, the commission focused on two options drafted by experts outside the government.

One, titled "Stability First," calls for continuing to try to stabilize Baghdad, boosting efforts to entice insurgents into politics, and bringing Iran and Syria into plans to end the fighting.

The other, called "Redeploy and Contain," goes further. It calls for a gradual, phased withdrawal of American troops to bases outside Iraq where they would be available for strikes against terrorist organizations anywhere in the region.

The experts also prepared an option called "Stay the Course, Redefine the Mission," and an alternative urging a quick U.S. withdrawal, but the panel appeared less interested in those plans, participants said.

The options were first reported last week by the New York Sun.

Baker and other commission members refused to confirm the substance of the options and emphasized that the panel had made no decisions. But Baker signaled the thrust of the panel's deliberations in several television interviews last week.

"Our commission believes that there are alternatives between the stated alternatives, the ones that are out there in the political debate of 'stay the course' and 'cut and run,' " Baker said.

The former secretary of State, who was a longtime aide to former President George H.W. Bush, also said he favored reaching out to Iran and Syria.

"I personally believe in talking to your enemies," he said. "Neither the Syrians nor the Iranians want a chaotic Iraq … so maybe there is some potential for getting something other than opposition from those countries."

Bringing Iran and Syria into negotiations would require significant changes in U.S. policy.

"To bring them in, we need to stop emphasizing things like democracy and start emphasizing things like stability and territorial integrity," said James Dobbins of the Rand Corp., a former U.S. envoy to Afghanistan. "We need to stop talking about regime change. It's unreasonable to think you can stabilize Iraq and destabilize Iran and Syria at the same time."

The Iraq Study Group said Dobbins was one of its advisors. Dobbins refused to talk about the panel's work, and said he was giving a personal opinion. Other participants described the commission's discussions on condition they not be identified because Baker had asked them to keep the work confidential.

Baker, promoting a new volume of his memoirs in a recent flurry of television interviews, including an appearance on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart," offered his views on issues under consideration by the panel. He also appeared on ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos," PBS' "The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" and PBS' "The Charlie Rose Show."

After the publicity blitz drew quiet grumbles from other panel participants, Baker canceled a scheduled breakfast with newspaper reporters and declined a request from The Times for an interview.

In his interviews, Baker said he did not support calls for an early withdrawal of U.S. troops. "I think that if we picked up and left right now that you would see the biggest civil war you've ever seen," he said.

He also said he did not agree with proposals to divide Iraq into three states for Sunni Arabs, Shiites and Kurds. "Most all the experts we've talked with think that might … trigger a civil war."

And instead of trying to bring democracy to all nations in the Middle East, he said, the U.S. should define success as achieving "representative government, not necessarily democracy."

Another participant, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the panel was considering whether the United States should warn the Iraqi government to get its "act together or else," a threat to withdraw troops unless the government's performance improved.

An administration official was skeptical that the panel would uncover new policy options, but said the White House would welcome ideas.

"If an independent group like the Baker panel can come up with some good ideas, we're all for it," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity because his comment had not been approved.

Participants in the Iraq Study Group said an additional goal was to identify options that Republicans and Democrats could endorse.

The commission is scheduled to meet again in mid-November. It hopes to deliver a report to Bush, Congress and the public by early 2007.

Some members of Congress, including Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John W. Warner (R-Va.), asked Baker to provide a report after next month's congressional elections, but Baker reportedly concluded that he would need more time to build a bipartisan consensus on significant recommendations.

Baker and Hamilton noted that the panel had consulted more than 150 experts, including representatives of Iran and Syria, and that its members spent four days in Iraq this year.

Administration officials also have briefed the panel.

"You can't come out of those briefings and not have a sense that things are in real bad shape," one participant said. "The bottom line is, it's not working. They know that. And they know that time is not on their side."

doyle.mcmanus@latimes.com

--

Times staff writers Paul Richter and Peter Spiegel contributed to this report.




Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
"My attitude is: Don't do what you're doing if it's not working — change," Bush said at a news conference.
__________________________________________________

Well, this is news.  New news, as opposed to old news.  I've never heard Bush 41 say anything like that before.  "I'm resolute.  Stay the course.  We're not leaving. " etc.

Oh wait, he did say he's "adapting."  That evidently means when he orders the bug out,  it's  simply a good strategic move.
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
<<And instead of trying to bring democracy to all nations in the Middle East, he said, the U.S. should define success as achieving "representative government, not necessarily democracy.">>

I think it's a great idea.  And Saddam Hussein could be just the guy to "represent" the Iraqi people.  Or John Bolton.  Why can't Bolton be their representative?  Doesn't he dress nicely?  Fuck democracy, it never caught on in the U.S.A., what made them think it would work in Iraq?

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
What's totally hilarious is the last-gasp desperation of these lying, thieving, murdering bastards.  Now even the pretence of "achieving democracy" is gone from their bungling hands, they've actually run out of excuses, the bullshit machine has dried up.  Now they think that Syria and Iran will be pleased to assist them in their raping and kiling.  HEY!!!  BUSH!!!  What about North Korea?  Aren't you going to invite North Korea to the party too?

Must be a great feeling.  They don't have to pretend any more.  No more need to rack their brains to come up with excuses and lies, each one more preposterous than the last, for all the idiots of America.  Weapons of Mass Destruction?  Fuck that!!!  Democracy for the Iraqis even if it costs us half a trillion bucks?  Gag me with a spoon!!  Fighting the war on terror there before we have to fight it here??   BWAHAHAHAHAH!!!  It's that old-fashioned rape, pillage and looting, guys, just like my friend Michael Tee told you right from the start.  Hey, Syria, Iraq, you Axis of Evil Bastards, jump in and get your share!!!  Party at Saddam's place!!!  Wheeeeee!!!!!

Mucho

  • Guest
A horrible but entirely plausible scenario on the "endgame" in Iraq occurred to me. The Repubs Dear Leader, the Bushidiot , would prefer that the whole country descends into bloody chaos rather tan do something necessary such as inviting Iran & Syria in to stop it. He could even pull a PeeWee as Repubs always do and say " Oh yeah ? I knew that"  when the wholesale slaughter reaches crescendos of murder & mayhem in that sad country The neo-cons would be thrilled at that because what the REALLY wanted to do all along was have ragheads killed no matter who they were and the Bushidolaters in here would happily make excuses for the genocide. Yes, they are all THAT vile.

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
the Bushidolaters in here would happily make excuses for the genocide.

All we'd have to do would be to retread the ones used in '94 for Rwanda.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
<<A horrible but entirely plausible scenario on the "endgame" in Iraq occurred to me. The Repubs Dear Leader, the Bushidiot , would prefer that the whole country descends into bloody chaos rather tan do something necessary such as inviting Iran & Syria in to stop it.>>

That's actually the Israeli position.  Take one of Israel's most powerful enemies, invade it and leave it divided into three warring entities massacring one another for the next hundred years.  One less problem for Israel.

The jihadist line to the U.S. puppet rulers in the region is basically, "The U.S. wants to fix you like it fixed Iraq.  For Israel.  Ruin you and ruin your country."

Personally I have no doubt that it is that policy that Perle and Wolfowicz were secretly trying to sell to the "President" in a very disguised form, but I think - - and so does Noam Chomsky - - that U.S. interests and Israeli interests really diverge here.  The U.S. is there for the oil and they want a united Iraq with lots of U.S. bases that they can rule through a puppet (one puppet rather than three) so that they have the oil from both the north and the south under one management.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Can you imagine.....reality?
« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2006, 12:21:41 AM »
<<A horrible but entirely plausible scenario on the "endgame" in Iraq occurred to me. The Repubs Dear Leader, the Bushidiot , would prefer that the whole country descends into bloody chaos rather tan do something necessary such as inviting Iran & Syria in to stop it.>>

That's actually the Israeli position.  Take one of Israel's most powerful enemies, invade it and leave it divided into three warring entities massacring one another for the next hundred years.  One less problem for Israel.
The jihadist line to the U.S. puppet rulers in the region is basically, "The U.S. wants to fix you like it fixed Iraq.  For Israel.  Ruin you and ruin your country."

You gotta love the mind of the eternally warped.  Yea, let's "be nice", let's say "Pretty please, stop trying to kill us and the Israelis.  We're really nice people, if you get to know us.  Well, actually we're still at heart the most opressive and totalitarian regime on the globe, just above Israel, but we'll share some of our secrets with you, if you just play nice.  Could we interest you in a few nuclear warheads, to demonstrate how honorable our intentions are?"

 ;)
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Would Iran and Syria be "tied down" in Iraq?

Would their armed forces be used up and spread thin?



Hmmmmmmmm....

Mucho

  • Guest
Would Iran and Syria be "tied down" in Iraq?

Would their armed forces be used up and spread thin?



Hmmmmmmmm....

Nope- Syria & Iran know how to fight. We do not.

Mucho

  • Guest
Re: Can you imagine.....reality?
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2006, 01:36:30 AM »
<<A horrible but entirely plausible scenario on the "endgame" in Iraq occurred to me. The Repubs Dear Leader, the Bushidiot , would prefer that the whole country descends into bloody chaos rather tan do something necessary such as inviting Iran & Syria in to stop it.>>

That's actually the Israeli position.  Take one of Israel's most powerful enemies, invade it and leave it divided into three warring entities massacring one another for the next hundred years.  One less problem for Israel.
The jihadist line to the U.S. puppet rulers in the region is basically, "The U.S. wants to fix you like it fixed Iraq.  For Israel.  Ruin you and ruin your country."

You gotta love the mind of the eternally warped.  Yea, let's "be nice", let's say "Pretty please, stop trying to kill us and the Israelis.  We're really nice people, if you get to know us.  Well, actually we're still at heart the most opressive and totalitarian regime on the globe, just above Israel, but we'll share some of our secrets with you, if you just play nice.  Could we interest you in a few nuclear warheads, to demonstrate how honorable our intentions are?"

 ;)

Looks like you are already prcticing making excuses for the genocide. It really isnt a good one , but keep on trying. You certainly had enough experience .

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Would Iran and Syria be "tied down" in Iraq?

Would their armed forces be used up and spread thin?



Hmmmmmmmm....

Nope- Syria & Iran know how to fight. We do not.



What would they be doing that we do not know how to do?

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
<<You gotta love the mind of the eternally warped.  Yea, let's "be nice", let's say "Pretty please, stop trying to kill us and the Israelis.  We're really nice people, if you get to know us.  Well, actually we're still at heart the most opressive and totalitarian regime on the globe, just above Israel, but we'll share some of our secrets with you, if you just play nice.  Could we interest you in a few nuclear warheads, to demonstrate how honorable our intentions are?">>

?????  I take it from all the sarcasm that you are in favour of a hard line against Iraq.  So the policy I described is the Israeli policy towards Iraq, which their agents tried to get the U.S. to adopt - - and it's a hard-line policy, to say the least.

So what's your problem?  If you agree with the policy, you shouldn't have any problem seeing it spelled out in simple, easy to understand terms.  Unless, of course, you're a hypocrite and don't like people to know what policies you really favour.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
<<Would Iran and Syria be "tied down" in Iraq?>>

probably

<<Would their armed forces be used up and spread thin?>>

very likely

<<Hmmmmmmmm....>>

Yeah, maybe Bush the Great Diplomat could persuade them both to take on North Korea and Venezuela at the same time as Iraq.  Think how tied down, used up and spread thin THAT would make 'em.  Get Bolton on the phone!  HE'LL sell 'em.

All in all, I must say it's a good sign to see the desperation verging on lunacy, very similar to the last days of Hitler in the bunker, when the murderous bastards finally realize that all their plans for world domination are crumbling before their very eyes.  The hope for last-minute miracles, for the sudden appearance of secret weapons, for undreamed-of solutions to the way out of the quagmire flash before their eyes, they snatch at any straw because - - finally - - the realization is beginning to seep into their primitive brains that they are doomed, that they cannot win.  That they and their ilk will carry on their heads the disappointed rage of their fellow citizens who finally realize that they've been had, that it was all a giant con, that they've squandered their treasure, their sons' lives and limbs for a cheap pack of lies purveyed by a smirking con man.  It is really delicious.


« Last Edit: October 17, 2006, 11:22:44 AM by Michael Tee »

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
"It is really delicious."
__________________________

No no no!
I want to see Rule of Law again prevail here.  I want people who flout it punished.  The Hague sounds like a good place to start.

I am not happy with the country under BushRule.   It is not America.   It is divided, it's almost tribally divided. 
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.