1
   

Iraq Study Group Report - Summary Please?

 
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 01:51 pm
Alan Simpson, the retired Republican senator from Wyoming, lambasted "100-percenters" -- people who took inflexible views on Iraq policy and refused to consider alternatives.

"A 100-percenter is a person you don't want to be around," Simpson said. "They have gas, ulcers, heartburn and B.O. They're not seekers; they're seethers."
Baker in writing to president Bush said ""Our country deserves a debate that prizes substance over rhetoric,"
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Dec, 2006 03:05 pm
the report excerpts alone make it clear that it's totally in le toilette, as they say.

and there are only two choices, both of which suck;

1) bail the hell out NOW and watch as the region's big dogs fight over the scraps. leading to an other war down the road.

2) pull allied troops back to quieter areas, and then bomb and shell the crap out of the place. kill lots of bad guys and even more plain citizens. when the smoke clears, call halliburton and pals to fix it and prepare to spend another 500 billion dollars in iraq and restocking and training the us military.

yup. sucks alright.

but if this administration continues as it has for the last 6 years, all that's gonna happen is more photo ops and rhinestone cowboy goat poop..

thanks bushie. and congrats, you finally got yer legacy !
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 05:58 am
I'm thinking option 2 probably looks pretty good to some involved.

I wasn't sure what to expect with Baker, given his ties to the previous George and Carlysle Group.

So, in the end we get a report that says things are really bad, but the president thinks we can still win, and (Gawd, tell me I didn't hear this correctly) we are now waiting on another report???
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 10:14 am
Iraq Report Underscores Bush Stubbornness
When you consider the lost time in the nation's struggle in Iraq, it is painful to read the recommendations in the Baker-Hamilton report (PDF) to Congress.

The blame for the refusal to face reality over this prolonged war rests squarely in the Oval Office. President Bush's stubbornness has led to this mess.

To be sure, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his longtime pal Vice President Cheney played a large role in this predicament. However, the president could have ignored their advice from time to time as the war dragged on. He didn't.

The vacant talk of "stay the course, victory, democracy" no longer has any meaning. Bush was blind to the reality that Iraq was slipping steadily into a religious and civil war. Our troops are now caught in the middle of a veritable shooting gallery.

Don't expect any miracles from the new secretary of defense, Robert Gates.

Gates did demonstrate a new approach to dealing with members of Congress. Unlike Rumsfeld, he displayed no arrogance or belligerence in his short answers to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

By contrast, in his many appearances before committees in Congress, Rumsfeld was intent on trying to be the smartest man in the room. He fooled only himself, and the country was the big loser.

Rumsfeld is gone. Cheney seems almost irrelevant to any direction of our foreign policy. Cheney's early words that our military would be treated as "liberators" are especially galling now.

If the president has any sense, he will adopt many of the study group's ideas, including the willingness to sit down with the Syrians and Iranians. As the study group emphasized, we sat down with the Soviets during the Cold War for many years, a reality that was lost on Bush, who came to office without a clue on foreign affairs.

When he received the report, the president relied on his usual instincts. He praised the group for being strong in the face of a city where playing politics is customary.

Sorry, Mr. President. That doesn't pass the smell test. You have been playing the political game for far too long.

Now, it is finally time to do the right thing.

Posted at 06:00 PM by John W. Mashek
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 11:03 am
Bush will not change; he's that stubborn - even while the Middle East is now in flames, and his approval rating is in the dumps.!
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 01:14 pm
squinney wrote:
I'm thinking option 2 probably looks pretty good to some involved.

I wasn't sure what to expect with Baker, given his ties to the previous George and Carlysle Group.

So, in the end we get a report that says things are really bad, but the president thinks we can still win, and (Gawd, tell me I didn't hear this correctly) we are now waiting on another report???


nope. ya heard right. bush said something the other day like, "the isg's report is only one that we'll be looking at".

baker... he at least, i think, has some grasp of geo-political reality. unlike the ideologues from pnac.

option 2 would probably achieve bushie's "victory" and he'd get to ride in his ragtop limo down pennsylvania proudly waving his legacy flag.. but what he has done to america, on a lot of fronts, is gonna take a damn long time to repair.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 01:41 pm
I think "long time to repair" is too optimistic.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 01:58 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
I think "long time to repair" is too optimistic.


{sighhhhh} well it's the holidays and i'm trying to love the world for a few weeks...
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 02:57 pm
woiyo wrote:
Not impressed with the report. Nothing even closely to solutions are suggested in the report.


What would solutions be, in your opinion?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 03:06 pm
Infrablue, That's the problem with the invastion of Iraq; there are no easy solutions. This administration mismanaged everything from the very beginning, and after more than three years of incompetence, even the "expert" committee came up short. Bush still wants to bring democracy to the Middle East. There's no cure for stupid.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 04:08 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Infrablue, That's the problem with the invastion of Iraq; there are no easy solutions. This administration mismanaged everything from the very beginning, and after more than three years of incompetence, even the "expert" committee came up short. Bush still wants to bring democracy to the Middle East. There's no cure for stupid.


Yeah, it's just that woiyo rather offhandedly dismissed the Baker-Hamilton report; I thought that he might have some ideas closer to solutions than that of the report.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 05:26 pm
There are clear differences between the Baker-Hamilton view of the world and the Bush-Rice view. Wait a minute, who is Rice? Oh yeah, we forgot. The Secretary of State, Professor -Dr. -Ms Rice who was so wonderful prior to 9/11 at keeping close tabs on all of our enemies except for the ones actually plotting to murder our citizens, has been working her version, her view, of how to get things our way in the Middle East for about two years now and you can really see the results of her "we don't talk to our enemies" approach to isolating Iran and Syria. Except for that little conflagration on the Israeli-Lebanon border in which both of them played a major role, giving them the silent treatment has worked great.

Now here comes Baker-Hamilton with this weird idea of actually trying to talk to them. Who do they think they are dealing with? Those two are not like our staunch ally Saudi Arabia. They are likely to only say they will not support our foes and then do just that behind our backs.http://www.condiriceisangry.com/images/thumbs/top.bush.rice.jpg

Joe(the very idea)Nation
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 05:59 pm
Joe Nation wrote:
Now here comes Baker-Hamilton with this weird idea of actually trying to talk to them. Who do they think they are dealing with? Those two are not like our staunch ally Saudi Arabia. They are likely to only say they will not support our foes and then do just that behind our backs.


I had to read this a couple of times....

Thanks, Joe.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 06:20 pm
Sorry, I use too many pronouns.

Let me try to be more succinct.

Two world views:

One-

When you are the world's only super power you don't to talk to anyone.

Two-

When you are the world's only super power you have to talk to everyone.

Joe(George has never heard of view two)Nation
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Dec, 2006 06:23 pm
Joe(succinct)Nation, Understood you the first time. Wink
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Dec, 2006 07:35 am
Another interesting item from the ISG we're not hearing too much about in the press.

Only six fluent in Arabic at US Iraq embassy-panel

Quote:
WASHINGTON, Dec 6 (Reuters) - Among the 1,000 people who work in the U.S. Embassy in Iraq, only 33 are Arabic speakers and only six speak the language fluently, according to the Iraq Study Group report released on Wednesday.

"All of our efforts in Iraq, military and civilian, are handicapped by Americans' lack of knowledge of language and cultural understanding," the bipartisan panel said in its report. "In a conflict that demands effective and efficient communication with Iraqis, we are often at a disadvantage."

The report, written by five Republicans and five Democrats, recommended the U.S. government give "the highest possible priority to professional language proficiency and cultural training" for officials headed to Iraq.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Dec, 2006 07:52 am
WASHINGTON - More Americans than ever say President Bush is doing a pitiful job with the war, and an almost equally overwhelming number of people think Iraq won't turn out to be a stable democracy, a new poll showed Friday.

A whopping 71 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's handling of the war, while only 27 percent say he's done a good job, according to the AP-Ipsos poll.

Just nine percent of Americans believe the U.S. will end up with a clear-cut victory in Iraq, the poll indicated, while 63 percent said they don't think the country will become a stable democracy.

The public opinion was so lousy that even Bush's go-to issue - the economy - took a hit in the latest poll. His oversight of the economy sank to a 38 percent approval rating from last month's 43 percent.

The cratering of support for Bush's conduct of the war was evident on the floor of the Senate, where an emotional Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., ripped the strategy and tactics in Iraq.

"I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day," Smith said.

"That is absurd. It may even be criminal," added Smith, who voted for the resolution to go to war but said he had changed course after some soul-searching.

Some lawmakers who spent time in meetings Friday with Bush described him as being in denial and clueless about the American people's desire to see U.S. forces return home from Iraq.

"He has yet to get the message the American people sent him on Nov. 7," said Rep. Joe Crowley, D-New York, referring to the watershed midterm elections that ended GOP control of Congress.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/16201673.htm
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Dec, 2006 07:59 am
In case nobody else posted this, Squinney, here is The Economist's summary:

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8382305

You have to register, but this is one of their free articles.


Here is an op ed piece from there (also free)

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8381356&fsrc=nwlgafree
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Dec, 2006 09:04 am
Thanks, Deb.

I found this interesting, from the first article: And it would probably do no harm for Mr Bush to restate, as the report suggests, that "the United States does not seek to control Iraq's oil."


And yet:
Quote:
While the Bush administration, the media and nearly all the Democrats still refuse to explain the war in Iraq in terms of oil, the ever-pragmatic members of the Iraq Study Group share no such reticence.
Page 1, Chapter 1 of the Iraq Study Group report lays out Iraq's importance to its region, the U.S. and the world with this reminder: "It has the world's second-largest known oil reserves." The group then proceeds to give very specific and radical recommendations as to what the United States should do to secure those reserves. If the proposals are followed, Iraq's national oil industry will be commercialized and opened to foreign companies.
The report makes visible to everyone the elephant in the room: that we are fighting, killing and dying in a war for oil. It states in plain language that the U.S. government should use every tool at its disposal to ensure that American oil interests and those of its corporations are met.
It's spelled out in Recommendation No. 63, which calls on the U.S. to "assist Iraqi leaders to reorganize the national oil industry as a commercial enterprise" and to "encourage investment in Iraq's oil sector by the international community and by international energy companies." This recommendation would turn Iraq's nationalized oil industry into a commercial entity that could be partly or fully privatized by foreign companies.
Link
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Dec, 2006 01:37 pm
Bush is one of the most bull-headed persons there is. He brags that he doesn't change his mind ("stay the course"). Thus, even if this dogmatism endangers our soldiers and country, as well as the rest of the world, don't expect Bush to change.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 09:55:11