pbMay 5th, 2007 - 21:42:20

The longer the war continues, the more chance of an outright sectarian conflict out of control, influenced also by outsiders such as al Qaeda. We are past the point of repair, and Dr. Rice's willingness to be a diplomat during the conference, with countries on the wrong side of Bush's 'GOOD/EVIL' paradigm, is another good step, taken too late.

The Saudi monarchy is of course concerned for its own safety, as well as the government of Saudi Arabia and other neighboring states with great oil wealth. If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.

At present, the opium farmers in Afghanistan pay protection to the Taliban, which in turns funds al Qaeda.

The Iraq Study Group model was well thought out, and Bush should not have rejected it outright. It would have required some rethinking and compromise, and neither quality is within Bush's skill set.

Report this comment

Bush ate my homeworkMay 7th, 2007 - 05:43:41

'The longer the war continues, the more chance of an outright sectarian conflict out of control, influenced also by outsiders such as al Qaeda. '

So if we left it would get all better.... Riiiiigghhhht...

'Bush's 'GOOD/EVIL' paradigm'

Al Queda is trying to start a civil war and it is all Bush's fault... News flash pb, they ARE evil.

'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'

So we should pack up and leave Iraq then.... ???


'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'

Everyone hear that?

'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'

One more time?

'If that wealth were to fall into terrorist hands, the outcome would be unimaginable.'

Pass that along to Harry and Nan.

'At present, the opium farmers in Afghanistan pay protection to the Taliban, which in turns funds al Qaeda.'

And your point there is?

'The Iraq Study Group model was well thought out, and Bush should not have rejected it outright.'

Gee, that is exactly what he did... no wait, it isn't what he did.

'It would have required some rethinking and compromise, and neither quality is within Bush's skill set.'

When you wet the bed, do you blame it on Bush?

Report this comment

pbMay 7th, 2007 - 07:03:51

Re: 'So if we left it would get all better.... Riiiiigghhhht... ' etc.
---

Boy, you must have worked overtime on that set of excuses.

The opium farmers are paying off the Taliban, because we did not actually drive them out of Afghanistan. Even terrorists need funding. Our continued presence in Iraq, and the re-ignition of a 1300 year old sectarian conflict, results in militia on both sides receiving funding from oil-wealthy partisans, so that they can buy weapons to fight each other.

Yes, it's Bush's fault for not completing the mission in Afghanistan, and getting sidetracked in Iraq. He's the CIC, and he gets the blame.

The Iraq Study Group findings were proposed in order to be adopted as a complete set, and not cherry-picked, per Hamilton. Bush said 'Thanks, but no thanks', and took the parts that he chose.

-------
The House Republican leader said Sunday that GOP support could waver if President Bush's Iraq war policy does not succeed by the fall. House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Bush's troop increase deserves a chance and should be funded even if benchmarks for success are not met.

'Over the course of the next three to four months, we'll have some idea how well the plan's working. Early signs are indicating there is clearly some success on a number of fronts,' he said.

But, he added, 'By the time we get to September or October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B.'
-------

(Plan B will be setting up benchmarks for the Iraqi Government to meet, as that's the real problem, rather than our military progress vs. an enemy we cannot calculate. Boehner is trying to have it both ways - funding; and no standards for success. Won't work. He says that he 'wants to know how well this is working', but wants no standards in order to accomplish that).

Report this comment