Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Well, that didn't take long: Bush ignores ISG report criticisims

Zen Peach





Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2006 at 02:26 PM
...sigh...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/12/09/national/w13285 6S19.DTL&type=politics

EDIT: Yahoo has moved the original story but left this link up and it points to a totally unrelated story. The new link is to SFGate.com

[Edited on 12/10/2006 by SquatchTexas]

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 
Replies:

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20739
(20824 all sites)
Registered: 11/26/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2006 at 02:44 PM
Are you pretending to be surprised, or did you think Bush was visited by three spirits in the night?

The report, I hate to point out, is not perfect. The ISG is right that the situation is very bad, but the solution they've proposed seems calculated to please the greatest number of people possible. That's not the best way to solve a problem. And the primary reason the group existed in the first place, probably, was to make it look like Bush is listening to other people.

 

____________________

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2073
(2073 all sites)
Registered: 12/1/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2006 at 04:35 PM
quote:
or did you think Bush was visited by three spirits in the night?



Now that was funny.......

 

____________________
Copying from a single source is called plagiarism, copying from multiple source is called research.....

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2006 at 06:34 PM
quote:
Are you pretending to be surprised, or did you think Bush was visited by three spirits in the night?

The report, I hate to point out, is not perfect. The ISG is right that the situation is very bad, but the solution they've proposed seems calculated to please the greatest number of people possible. That's not the best way to solve a problem. And the primary reason the group existed in the first place, probably, was to make it look like Bush is listening to other people.


No, Im not surprised, except maybe that it took this long for him to discard the report. I totally agree with your assessment. Well, we have all had a number of years now to recognize that Bush doesnt take suggestions from anyone and he stays the course while driving the Titanic into the icefield. The ISG was the first formal group to recommend changes (IIRC) and it just adds to the pile of information that he has ignored. I dont know why he does it..why he cant take advice. I honestly think he is probably the only president to not ever listen to the advice given to him. No man can do that job all on their own.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8436
(8437 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2006 at 06:59 PM
quote:
And the primary reason the group existed in the first place, probably, was to make it look like Bush is listening to other people.

I wouldn't say it's just Bush. Ever notice the increasing level of dependence that our elected officials are placing on (select the one that fits): blue ribbon panels, study groups, bi-partisan committees, etc?

I thought we elected these folks to do the work of studying issues, finding solutuons, reaching compromises, and enacting solutions. Not any more. They've all found they can duck responsibility by creating these groups and using them to do the dirty work. Don't like the outcome? "Oh, sorry Mr./Ms. Voter, but I went along with the findings of the committee which determined...."

Makes me sick. Do the job we elected you for Senator/Congressperson/whatever. Stand up and be counted. Don't hide behind others work.

Diatribe completed - you can now return to our regularily scheduled programing....

 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2006 at 08:41 PM
quote:
quote:
And the primary reason the group existed in the first place, probably, was to make it look like Bush is listening to other people.

I wouldn't say it's just Bush. Ever notice the increasing level of dependence that our elected officials are placing on (select the one that fits): blue ribbon panels, study groups, bi-partisan committees, etc?

I thought we elected these folks to do the work of studying issues, finding solutuons, reaching compromises, and enacting solutions. Not any more. They've all found they can duck responsibility by creating these groups and using them to do the dirty work. Don't like the outcome? "Oh, sorry Mr./Ms. Voter, but I went along with the findings of the committee which determined...."

Makes me sick. Do the job we elected you for Senator/Congressperson/whatever. Stand up and be counted. Don't hide behind others work.

Diatribe completed - you can now return to our regularily scheduled programing....


Good points, Rich. I see these panels as a kind of two way street. One way is like you say but the other way is that oftentimes these issues are so broad that devoting the time needed to adequately study and understand the nuances of a particular problem can be very time intensive and if you dont have the proper skillset, then you may not even know what you are looking for. This is what these panels do. Its very similar to hiring consultants on the outside. They have their value, but you cannot place 100% of the solution based on their recommendations. Take what they say as part of the solution rather than the whole.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6166
(6170 all sites)
Registered: 6/10/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2006 at 10:53 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
And the primary reason the group existed in the first place, probably, was to make it look like Bush is listening to other people.

I wouldn't say it's just Bush. Ever notice the increasing level of dependence that our elected officials are placing on (select the one that fits): blue ribbon panels, study groups, bi-partisan committees, etc?

I thought we elected these folks to do the work of studying issues, finding solutuons, reaching compromises, and enacting solutions. Not any more. They've all found they can duck responsibility by creating these groups and using them to do the dirty work. Don't like the outcome? "Oh, sorry Mr./Ms. Voter, but I went along with the findings of the committee which determined...."

Makes me sick. Do the job we elected you for Senator/Congressperson/whatever. Stand up and be counted. Don't hide behind others work.

Diatribe completed - you can now return to our regularily scheduled programing....


Good points, Rich. I see these panels as a kind of two way street. One way is like you say but the other way is that oftentimes these issues are so broad that devoting the time needed to adequately study and understand the nuances of a particular problem can be very time intensive and if you dont have the proper skillset, then you may not even know what you are looking for. This is what these panels do. Its very similar to hiring consultants on the outside. They have their value, but you cannot place 100% of the solution based on their recommendations. Take what they say as part of the solution rather than the whole.


Your a hoot Squatchy. You post an article that does nothing to support your subject matter, if properly read & comprehended, then you go on to talk about 'the nuances of a particular problem', because no one has a 'proper skillset' to understand the situation. Ah, the 'nuances'. It's all so complicated. God, it sounds just like John F'ing Kerry.

You whine on about Bush 'ignoring' the Iraq Surrender Group's recommendations, when if you actually bothered to read the article it says "he will consider all of the panel's recommendations". That's hardly 'ignoring' them, as you assert. Like I said before, you need to smell what you're shovelling.

I work with consultants on a daily basis. As you said they have their value, but truthfully, it's not much. They only do what others have no time to do. It's more a cost-cutting measure by management and the bean-counters have justified consultants over personnel. I have found that those that have completely relied upon consultants to be very poor managers.

BTW, great post Rich. A prime example of what we have come to expect. We believe we elect leaders, and when some actually do so, we can't wait to b!tch about it.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 12:01 AM
quote:
Your a hoot Squatchy. You post an article that does nothing to support your subject matter, if properly read & comprehended, then you go on to talk about 'the nuances of a particular problem', because no one has a 'proper skillset' to understand the situation. Ah, the 'nuances'. It's all so complicated. God, it sounds just like John F'ing Kerry.


I started out calling you an idiot but then remembered that Yahoo is really good at changing articles but leaving links and thats what happened here. The article that was there when I made this post, in the first paragraph, said exactly what my headline did. Believe it or not. I would have expected you to use a little common sense and realize Im not going to knowingly post an irrelevant article. As for the "nuances", I am going to call you an idiot for not having any common sense (theme?). Nobody, and I mean NOBODY has a 100% understanding of the issues in Iraq. If you think you do, you better get over there to help out. If you are still confused, I suggest you look up the word "nuances".

EDIT: I had found the relevant passage over at DU, but figured I could keyword search it and I found it over at SFGate.com



Bush Ignores Criticism of Iraq Strategy

By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer

Saturday, December 9, 2006 01 28 PM
12-09) 13:28 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --

President Bush spoke Saturday about parts of the Iraq Study Group report that mirror his policies -- but he ignored the sections that criticize his administration's handling of the war.

In his weekly radio broadcast, Bush said the bipartisan group's report presented a straightforward picture of the "grave situation we face in Iraq." He said he was pleased the panel supported his goal of an Iraq that can govern, sustain and defend itself, even though that will take time. And he said he was glad the bipartisan panel did not suggest a hasty withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

"The group declared that such a withdrawal would `almost certainly produce greater sectarian violence' and lead to `a significant power vacuum, greater human suffering, regional destabilization and a threat to the global economy,'" Bush said, quoting the report, which was issued Thursday.

"The report went on to say, `If we leave and Iraq descends into chaos, the long-range consequences could eventually require the United States to return,'" Bush noted.

The report, however, also said the situation in Iraq was "grave and deteriorating."

Bush is expected to settle on a new course for Iraq and present it to the nation in a speech before Christmas. He said he will consider the panel's 79 recommendations.

More at the link...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/12/09/national/w13285 6S19.DTL&type=politics




quote:
You whine on about Bush 'ignoring' the Iraq Surrender Group's recommendations, when if you actually bothered to read the article it says "he will consider all of the panel's recommendations". That's hardly 'ignoring' them, as you assert. Like I said before, you need to smell what you're shovelling.


And Im going to tell you that the article has changed since I first posted it. First paragraph said it word for word.

quote:
I work with consultants on a daily basis. As you said they have their value, but truthfully, it's not much. They only do what others have no time to do.


Gee, this all sounds familiar...wonder where I saw this???

quote:
It's more a cost-cutting measure by management and the bean-counters have justified consultants over personnel. I have found that those that have completely relied upon consultants to be very poor managers.


Which is why I said what I said previously.

[Edited on 12/10/2006 by SquatchTexas]

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6166
(6170 all sites)
Registered: 6/10/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 12:47 AM
quote:
quote:
Your a hoot Squatchy. You post an article that does nothing to support your subject matter, if properly read & comprehended, then you go on to talk about 'the nuances of a particular problem', because no one has a 'proper skillset' to understand the situation. Ah, the 'nuances'. It's all so complicated. God, it sounds just like John F'ing Kerry.


I started out calling you an idiot but then remembered that Yahoo is really good at changing articles but leaving links and thats what happened here. The article that was there when I made this post, in the first paragraph, said exactly what my headline did. Believe it or not. As for the "nuances", I am going to call you an idiot for not having any common sense. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY has a 100% understanding of the issues in Iraq. If you think you do, you better get over there to help out. If you are still confused, I suggest you look up the word "nuances". Ill make sure to include the relevant parts in the future so that this doesnt happen again. Sorry.


Love your namecalling. It adds so much to the discussion. You're so profound. We are all just awe at your debating skills. It really proves your point, Ad hominen boy.

You blame me for the change in the posting? Why don't you understand that you have become a tool of the media? You post articles that constantly change, and then go on to say you rely on 'facts'. These aren't facts, they're opinion dressed up as a story. Truth of it is, is that I could find anything on the 'net that supports my bias, just as you do with regularity. It doesn't make them factual just because they are posted. I thought you could tell the difference by now. Like I said, you need to smell the stuff you're shovelling.

If you say that "NOBODY has a 100% understanding of the issues in Iraq", why castigate others for not having a full understanding? Maybe I give you too much credit. Maybe you are just a tool.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 05:25 AM
quote:
Love your namecalling. It adds so much to the discussion. You're so profound. We are all just awe at your debating skills. It really proves your point, Ad hominen boy.


Yeah, yeah and Im a tool, remember?

quote:
You blame me for the change in the posting? Why don't you understand that you have become a tool of the media? You post articles that constantly change, and then go on to say you rely on 'facts'.


Blaming you? Not hardly. Unless you work for Yahoo, I dont see how you are involved. Are you a victim now? Gee, which other articles have I posted that have "constantly" changed? Be Specific. It should be easy since you seem to have knowledge of so many.

quote:
These aren't facts, they're opinion dressed up as a story. Truth of it is, is that I could find anything on the 'net that supports my bias, just as you do with regularity.


Yes, Im sure you apply this directly to each and everything you "agree" with, right?

Youre right. Im wrong. Bush has taken all the recommendations under careful consideration and the media is lying to us when they say that he ignored the criticisims. I dont know what I was thinking. Thank you for setting me straight. Ill get all of my information from you from now on.

quote:
It doesn't make them factual just because they are posted.


Duhh, you think so? Amazing analytical skills you got there.

quote:
I thought you could tell the difference by now. Like I said, you need to smell the stuff you're shovelling.


..said the Bush supporter.

quote:
If you say that "NOBODY has a 100% understanding of the issues in Iraq", why castigate others for not having a full understanding? Maybe I give you too much credit. Maybe you are just a tool.


LOL.. so someone does? Who? Be specific. It should be easy since you appear to know the answer already.

[Edited on 12/10/2006 by SquatchTexas]

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20739
(20824 all sites)
Registered: 11/26/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:50 AM
quote:
You whine on about Bush 'ignoring' the Iraq Surrender Group's recommendations, when if you actually bothered to read the article it says "he will consider all of the panel's recommendations". That's hardly 'ignoring' them, as you assert.

You've obviously never had anybody ignore your input by saying "I'll take that into consideration." I'd be surprised if his "new course" (mentioned in ST's link) is really new, but I also doubt it will totally ignore the ISG.

"Iraq Surrender Group." That's so amusing. It's as if you don't know that most Americans - and I'm going to go out on a limb and say most Iraqis, too - want us out of there.

 

____________________

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5331
(5370 all sites)
Registered: 11/29/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:52 AM
As one of "most" Americans ....i do want us out of there.....and much sooner than later...
we never should have been "in there" in the first place....

 

____________________
Please support MusicNeverStops:TheTylerSeamanFoundation:
at www.tylersmusicroom.org

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 11:22 AM
quote:
quote:
You whine on about Bush 'ignoring' the Iraq Surrender Group's recommendations, when if you actually bothered to read the article it says "he will consider all of the panel's recommendations". That's hardly 'ignoring' them, as you assert.

You've obviously never had anybody ignore your input by saying "I'll take that into consideration." I'd be surprised if his "new course" (mentioned in ST's link) is really new, but I also doubt it will totally ignore the ISG.

"Iraq Surrender Group." That's so amusing. It's as if you don't know that most Americans - and I'm going to go out on a limb and say most Iraqis, too - want us out of there.


Just to give you an idea where CB is coming from, the "Iraq Surrender Group" was coined by Limbaugh himself. Anyone who gets their talking points from such excellence in broadcasting probably shouldnt be taken too seriously. We probably wont see any replies from him today. Maybe tomorrow after Limbaugh airs.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6009
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 1/19/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 11:36 AM
Here's an interesting articles that explains one of the reasons that Bush is ignoring the ISG reports.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/09/AR200612090 0443.html

Apparently many "conservative hawks" such as Sen John McCain (will someone "please" tell Senator McCain that "we don't have the extra troops to send") are giving the Bush administration the reasons to balk. Also, IMHO I think that Dubya, also doesn't like it that once again, that Daddy (through his friend, James Baker) is telling him how he screwed up and what he has to do to "hopefully" to get out of this predicament, that he put the United States into. Must be a bitch when Daddy's right and Junior's wrong.



[Edited on 12/10/2006 by cleaneduphippy]

 
E-Mail User

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9082
(9082 all sites)
Registered: 2/25/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 08:47 PM
James Baker, apparently moron extraordinaire....I was watching when they did that press conference the other day after the report came out, and my head nearly split apart listening to him. The first thing out of his mouth, "We must focus more broadly." I thought, hey you **** ing dimwit, that's not what focus means!!

I am severly skeptical of the notion that if the Palestinian/Israel conflict is solved then everything else will fall into place. If they think peace in Iraq is going to break out once they solve the Israel/Palestinian thing, they are sorely mistaken. First, these people have been going at it since the book of Genesis. Second, all of these people, including Bin Laden, that love the Palestinian issue and use it as a rallying cry are full of **** . No one cares about them, not Egypt, not Al Qeada, not Jordan, not Saudi Arabia, not Iran, not Iraq, and whoever else may say they do. I've read parts of Arafat's story and he talks about the Palestinians being escorted out of egypt under pointed gun, not by Jews, not by the Great Satan, but by Arabs. Third, Clinton actually did a great job in the '90s of brokering what should have been a peace deal; concessions were made, and Arafat didn't know when to take a deal. They basically through the whole kitchen sink at him and he still said NO to it. Everyone thought with Arafat out of the way that there would be a chance at peace, but they went and elected a group that, in its charter, says it is bent on the destruction of Israel. So they can FOCUS more broadly all they want, it ain't going to change **** in Iraq.

I think it also worth noting what Abizaid said at Harvard the other day which was essentially (paraphrasing here), we can walk away and leave them alone, but they won't leave us alone. I know they probably said the samething 30 yeras ago, but we already know what our current enemies are capable of doing.

Don't get me wrong, I think it is worth the effort to try, but for now, let's FOCUS on what the group was meant to focus on..IRAQ. They can sit around for another 8 months and talk about that issue some other time.

I'm also very sick of the whole America has to repair its image thing. I'm sick of politicians telling us how bad we are. Stop beating me over the head with how bad our country is. We are not perfect, but we are the best **** ing thing going. It would be nice if that region of the world got its **** ing head out of its ass and would repair their image. They've been at each other's throats before the U.S.A ever existed. Every last one of them is a dictatorship. Women are sub-human, education and jobs are virtually nil, and diversity is not really an accetable thing, as we can see with the ethnic violence in Iraq. Yeah, we have a lot of issues, but go live in another country, not even one where people hate us (although it seems at this point you'll be hard pressed to find a place), and you'll see there is no place like this one. I don't need politicians shouting to the hilltops about how bad we are and how we have to repair our image. How about some other people work on their image for a change.

Incidentally, does anyone know how they picked the people to be in this group and who were their resources, i.e. who did they consult to form their opinions?




[Edited on 12/11/2006 by jim]

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:19 PM
I dont know how they pick the people but they are supposed to be bipartisan picks. Baker, who has a long history with the Bushs, was a good pick IMO due to his extensive foreign policy experience. The others, I dont know much about. Is there a list of who was involved?

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20739
(20824 all sites)
Registered: 11/26/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:27 PM
quote:
The first thing out of his mouth, "We mus focus more broadly." I thought, hey you **** ing dimwit, that's not what focus means!!


He's using the definition of focus that means "to concentrate." As in, 'we need to concentrate on a broader solution, because stopgap measures are not working.' I know you don't like the thing, but there's no sense trying to nitpick the guy to death.

quote:
Is there a list of who was involved?

James Baker and Lee Hamilton (co-chairmen)
Sandra Day O'Connor, former Supreme Court Justice
Lawrence Eagleburger, former Secretary of State [replaced Bob Gates, who became SecDef]
Edwin Meese III, former US Attorney General [replaced Rudy Giuliani, who resigned due to time commitments]
Alan K. Simpson, former U.S. Senator from Wyoming
Vernon Jordan, Jr., business executive
Leon E. Panetta, former White House Chief of Staff
William J. Perry, former US Secretary of Defense
Charles S. Robb, former Governor and U.S. Senator from Virginia

Incidentally, Iraqi President Talabani said today, "As a whole, I reject this report."

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9082
(9082 all sites)
Registered: 2/25/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:30 PM
I know Leon Pinnetta, Vernon Jordan, Sandra Day O'Connor, James Baker, I think Robb may have been on it, and I'm completely drawing a blank on the other co-author with Baker. Why would Sandra Day O'Connor be on there? I often wonder how they pick these people, probably out of hat.
 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9082
(9082 all sites)
Registered: 2/25/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:32 PM
quote:
Incidentally, Iraqi President Talabani said today, "As a whole, I reject this report."


I saw that too. You hate to laugh, but its funny. These folks sat around for 8 months and thougt they probably had something for everyone, and Talabani comes out and says, I don't think so. Its like something out of SNL.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:34 PM
Anyone else troubled by the distinct lack of people from that part of the world that could have provided some very valuable insight?

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8436
(8437 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/10/2006 at 09:49 PM
quote:
I often wonder how they pick these people, probably out of hat.

I often feel the same way Jim, and that's a lot of what prompted my earlier comments about the use of committes, panels, etc.

It may have been mentioned earlier in the thread, but only one of this group has ever been outside the "green zone" in Baghdad. I'm not being disrespectful of their past service to the US, but beyond how they were picked, what qualifies these folks to be experts in this area? It all appears to be political cover for a weak administration and lame duck congress to make them look like their are doing something, while setting the stage for the new congress to take some action. About all the findings really do is make it easier to say what everyone's known for a long time: the Emperor has no clothes on this subject. Maybe the new-found ability to talk honestly in DC about this (the last place honest talk seems to occur in this country anymore) will help move us to some conclusion here - awful as all the prospects seem to be.

 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6009
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 1/19/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/11/2006 at 11:00 AM
quote:
James Baker, apparently moron extraordinaire....I was watching when they did that press conference the other day after the report came out, and my head nearly split apart listening to him. The first thing out of his mouth, "We must focus more broadly." I thought, hey you **** ing dimwit, that's not what focus means!!

I am severly skeptical of the notion that if the Palestinian/Israel conflict is solved then everything else will fall into place. If they think peace in Iraq is going to break out once they solve the Israel/Palestinian thing, they are sorely mistaken. First, these people have been going at it since the book of Genesis. Second, all of these people, including Bin Laden, that love the Palestinian issue and use it as a rallying cry are full of **** . No one cares about them, not Egypt, not Al Qeada, not Jordan, not Saudi Arabia, not Iran, not Iraq, and whoever else may say they do. I've read parts of Arafat's story and he talks about the Palestinians being escorted out of egypt under pointed gun, not by Jews, not by the Great Satan, but by Arabs. Third, Clinton actually did a great job in the '90s of brokering what should have been a peace deal; concessions were made, and Arafat didn't know when to take a deal. They basically through the whole kitchen sink at him and he still said NO to it. Everyone thought with Arafat out of the way that there would be a chance at peace, but they went and elected a group that, in its charter, says it is bent on the destruction of Israel. So they can FOCUS more broadly all they want, it ain't going to change **** in Iraq.

I think it also worth noting what Abizaid said at Harvard the other day which was essentially (paraphrasing here), we can walk away and leave them alone, but they won't leave us alone. I know they probably said the samething 30 yeras ago, but we already know what our current enemies are capable of doing.

Don't get me wrong, I think it is worth the effort to try, but for now, let's FOCUS on what the group was meant to focus on..IRAQ. They can sit around for another 8 months and talk about that issue some other time.

I'm also very sick of the whole America has to repair its image thing. I'm sick of politicians telling us how bad we are. Stop beating me over the head with how bad our country is. We are not perfect, but we are the best **** ing thing going. It would be nice if that region of the world got its **** ing head out of its ass and would repair their image. They've been at each other's throats before the U.S.A ever existed. Every last one of them is a dictatorship. Women are sub-human, education and jobs are virtually nil, and diversity is not really an accetable thing, as we can see with the ethnic violence in Iraq. Yeah, we have a lot of issues, but go live in another country, not even one where people hate us (although it seems at this point you'll be hard pressed to find a place), and you'll see there is no place like this one. I don't need politicians shouting to the hilltops about how bad we are and how we have to repair our image. How about some other people work on their image for a change.

Incidentally, does anyone know how they picked the people to be in this group and who were their resources, i.e. who did they consult to form their opinions?



Whatever Gunny.

quote:
Anyone else troubled by the distinct lack of people from that part of the world that could have provided some very valuable insight?



Squatch,

Here's a link that might help answer some of your questions. Appears to be lots of ignorance around here. Maybe some need to put brains in gear, before fingers in motion.

http://www.usip.org/isg/

Seems to me lots of people "bitched" about there being no other plans but "stay the course", which wasn't and isn't working. Now, when a group of people come up with some ideas about how to deal with "Iraqi" problem, then they "bitch" about the ideas that are presented and who the people are that presented these ideas. Truth is, the Bush administration has "hosed up" Iraq so damn badly, that there is no "good way" to deal with what's happening in Iraq. Basically what we got is "what the least "bad" way of dealing with this sh1t, that George W. and his ideological idiots buddies (i.e. neoconservatives) in their misguided pursuit of "democracy" in the Middle East got us into?"

Anybody but me, noticed that when you give Muslims the "right to vote" that they vote overwhelmingly for the radical, fundamentalist crowd and not the moderates?

Also, has anybody really noticed that what's happening in Iraq right now, is that the Shiites are trying to "ethically cleanse" Iraq of the Sunni population (sort of reminds you of Germany in the 30s/40s, and how they dealt with their "Jewish problem")?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/10/AR200612100 1021.html

And let's not forget that the moderate Muslims are primarily Sunnis, as are their governments. Think they are going to stand by and do nothing while the United States "help" train "democratically elected" Shiites (who we'll probably end up fighting down the road anyway) in "ethically cleansing" Sunnis?

Truth is, the question needs to be asked, which side is the United States going to take in the Iraqi Civil War? Because like it or not, one way or another, we're going to drawn to one side or the another. Neutrality is impossible. IMHO, the best thing the United States can do at this point, is get the hell out of there and let whatever is going to happen in Iraq, happen. Because right now, there ain't a damn thing we can do to change it, the forces of history are already on the march. Besides we got Gulf War Part III (The Main Event) coming up that we need to start getting ready for.

http://www.allmanbrothersband.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&am p;file=viewthread&tid=53599

[Edited on 12/11/2006 by cleaneduphippy]

 
E-Mail User

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/11/2006 at 12:30 PM
Good post, CUH. This whole thing reminds me of that South Park episode where they were supposed to vote for either Turd Sandwich or the Giant Douche. The point being that no option was very good (lesser of two evils). Your point about them electing fundamentalists is also right on target and something I alluded to a long while back. Democracy is not a new concept and these folks simply do not want our version of it. Also, never forget; Democracy is not why we went to Iraq and we have already meddled in their elections by getting rid of the person that was elected and installing Malawi who was more friendly to our influence. As a lapdog, he isnt a very good one though if you look at his commentary regarding the insurgents and how they have a right to attack our troops. I guess whoever thought that was a good idea didnt think it through. I just hope that with a new house and congress, they can put enough pressure on this group of single minded idiots enough to stop the bloodshed of our troops and start getting us out of there.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 29948
(30044 all sites)
Registered: 1/26/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/11/2006 at 01:29 PM
IT was think tanks like the "Heritage Foundation" that got us into this mess in the first place. Propossing
premptive democracy.

They are just a front for the "War Pigs" (the military industrial complex the Ike warned us about)

 

____________________
People Can you Feel It?

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6009
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 1/19/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/11/2006 at 02:47 PM
quote:
IT was think tanks like the "Heritage Foundation" that got us into this mess in the first place.



Now John,

All the pseudo-intellectuals that graduate from Ivy League universities got to have some place to work, thus we have "Think Tanks" Lord help them if they actually had to get their hands dirty.

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that America MIGHT be better off if most of our leaders had graduated from public funded state colleges than from the Ivy League?

 
E-Mail User
<<  1    2  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com