| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Gaffney: The new groupthink |
| 2006-11-29 |
| We are, as the saying goes, between Iraq and a hard place. Unfortunately, events this week seem likely to drive us inexorably closer to the hard place – one that is going to be a lot worse than what we have seen in Iraq so far. These events include a two-day trip to the woodshed in Amman, Jordan with President Bush for Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. They will be considering ways in which al-Maliki can prevent the collapse of his government and his country’s slide into full-scale civil war. Presumably, the two leaders will be factoring in the results of Vice President Cheney’s three-hour visit to Riyadh to appeal to the Saudi king, Abdullah, for help with Iraq. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani will be meeting with his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in Tehran to discuss bilateral relations. Presumably, among the topics for discussion will be the success Iran’s regime is having in its efforts to destroy a Free Iraq. Finally, there will be two days of deliberations by the Iraq Study Group, co-chaired by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Rep. Lee Hamilton. This panel, which was commissioned by Congress to examine alternatives to the present approach in Iraq, is reportedly considering a proposed report drafted largely at Mr. Baker’s direction. What all these events have in common is the notion that the “solution” to Iraq lies in a “regional” approach. The leitmotif is that U.S. unilateralism is dead, long live multilateralism. A chastened America will be brought to its senses by the collective wisdom of Jim Baker, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Kings Abdullah of Jordan and Saudi Arabia. But what, exactly, does this regional approach portend? |
| Posted by:.com |
| #10 Take a deep breath, as. Enough of those here who are (or aren't) talking are in places where they can do what's necessary, as well. It'll be ok, I promise. ;-) You just make sure your bit goes as it ought, too, 'k? Remember, President Bush long ago promised that this would be a long war, and most of it would take place in the shadows out of our sight... even out of yours. But historically the covert stuff hasn't changed all that much regardless which party was in power, and when it's all over we'll sit down for a nice cup of tea and exchange those tales that can be told. I intend to find it all fascinating, and I'll even make the scones that BA is so very fond of. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-11-29 23:37 |
| #9 Is Baker still a registered agent of the Saudis? Hard to say. I'm a little bleery-eyed: searching through Google brought me page after page of 9/11 Conspiracy Theory links and similar Left and Lefter claptrap. I finally found the FARA page of the DOJ, but the latest semiannual report I could find was for the first half of 2005. How long is the registration good for? Or is it one of those things that once you have it, you have it until you explicitly de-register? |
| Posted by: eLarson 2006-11-29 22:35 |
| #8 When people that care (patriots)don't have the power to do anything other than verbally spout off, it's all over... Put your heads between your legs and kiss yur asses "Goodbye! Political interests have the Country hog-tied. Thanks to the Pols; were fucked! Please advise. a DOD rantburger drone. |
| Posted by: as 2006-11-29 21:05 |
| #7 --Bush spent a lot of public statement chips leading up to the election. -- And a lot of good that did us, he should have used the budget veto chip on a few occasions. |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2006-11-29 10:47 |
| #6 Can we start bombing Iran now please? |
| Posted by: Excalibur 2006-11-29 09:46 |
| #5 The State of the Union address will turn into a repudiation of the ISG Surrender Bush's strategy is to time his public statements carefully, not to try to flood the zone every week. Remember Roosevelt made only 30 Fireside Chats in 12 years as president. That's less than 3 per year. Bush spent a lot of public statement chips leading up to the election. Speaking out now would do no good. So he's letting the other side have its head for a while. Then he will deflate them all in one night from the bulliest pulpit of them all. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-11-29 09:08 |
| #4 Is Baker still a registered agent of the Saudis? |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-11-29 04:48 |
| #3 Ain't gonna happen. Not much gonna happen. The groupthink is limited to groups that have no decision-making power. Check out Bush's speech in Riga today. Same as before. I say it's 50/50 that there isn't even a pro forma head-fake at a sham conference - but it's more like 99/1 that nothing substantive will change. Meanwhile, the "no worse enemy" part of the Marine formula has long since been discarded by our forces in Iraq. If you're AQ, you're in trouble. If you are the far more important quiet collaborator with AQ - can we dig you a well? do you have a job? did we offend you? Seems unlikely the "commission" will have even a single sentence worth reading, as they'll of course not go anywhere near the subject of how to actually fight in Iraq. |
| Posted by: Verlaine 2006-11-29 00:43 |
| #2 The problem is this simple: if the US moves out, the Ayatollahs move in. We have to play the Sunni Card while we can, but we can't do it by remote control. |
| Posted by: Sneaze Shaiting3550 2006-11-29 00:33 |
| #1 Years ago > Saving The Dems, Lefties, Euros, Socialists, Commies, Enviros, + Radical Muslims, etc. .....................@ from themselves, THUS OUR GLORIOUS REWARD. WE'RE THE FIRST ONES THAT HAS TO CONCEDE, SURRENDER ANDOR DIE. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-11-29 00:30 |