9
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

 
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 12:50 pm
From Juan Cole

Quote:
Bush Admits to Destroying Blair's Career

I just caught some of the Bush/Blair news conference on the adult version of CNN at noon.

At one point, a reporter asked Bush point blank if he had destroyed Tony Blair's political career.

Now, when you get a question like that as a politician, surely you have a lot of options for answering. You could reply with a self-deprecating joke. Or you could insist that Blair is a statesman in his own right whose record stands on its own. Or something.

What you wouldn't want to do is to grant the premise of the reporter's question.

Bush, with his deer in the headlight gaze, actually answered the question.

In the affirmative.

BBC says:
' Appearing at a joint press conference at the White House, Mr Bush was asked if he was responsible for the end of Mr Blair's premiership.

He said: "I could be" '

So since he admits he may have derailed the career of the longest serving Labour prime minister in decades, let's ask him something else.

Are you responsible, Mr. President, for sending the Middle East up in flames?


Seems like whatever Bush touches he screws it up.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 12:55 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

...
By 1998 his foundations were listed among donors to over 100 such groups, to which he had disbursed some $340 million by 2002.


Even if we use your claimed numbers for Soros, his donations don't come close to 340 million dollars.

Nice try tho

Cycloptichorn

Rolling Eyes More silly sophistry.

We are not discussing total donations. We are discussing total donations to politicians and political campaigning groups.


There is no difference between organizations such as GOPAC, the Media Research Center, and the AEI, and political campaigning groups. They exist solely to support Republican candidates, and that's it.

Nice piece of sophistry yourself there

Cycloptichorn

Rolling Eyes Please provide your evidence that all of these you listed are donations to politicians and political campaigning groups. Include the amount donated to each and your evidence for same.

* American Enterprise Institute
* Atlas Economic Research Foundation
* Center for the Study of Popular Culture (headed by David Horowitz)
* Federalist Society
* Foundation for Economic Education
* Free Congress Foundation (headed by Paul Weyrich)
* Freedom House
* GOPAC (headed by Newt Gingrich)
* Independent Women's Forum
* Intercollegiate Studies Institute (which operates the Collegiate Network)
* Judicial Watch
* Landmark Legal Foundation
* Media Research Center (headed by Brent Bozell)
* Pacific Legal Foundation
* Pittsburgh World Affairs Council
* Reason Foundation
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 12:57 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

...
By 1998 his foundations were listed among donors to over 100 such groups, to which he had disbursed some $340 million by 2002.


Even if we use your claimed numbers for Soros, his donations don't come close to 340 million dollars.

Nice try tho

Cycloptichorn

Rolling Eyes More silly sophistry.

We are not discussing total donations. We are discussing total donations to politicians and political campaigning groups.


There is no difference between organizations such as GOPAC, the Media Research Center, and the AEI, and political campaigning groups. They exist solely to support Republican candidates, and that's it.

Nice piece of sophistry yourself there

Cycloptichorn

Rolling Eyes Please provide your evidence that all of these you listed are donations to politicians and political campaigning groups. Include the amount donated to each and your evidence for same.

* American Enterprise Institute
* Atlas Economic Research Foundation
* Center for the Study of Popular Culture (headed by David Horowitz)
* Federalist Society
* Foundation for Economic Education
* Free Congress Foundation (headed by Paul Weyrich)
* Freedom House
* GOPAC (headed by Newt Gingrich)
* Independent Women's Forum
* Intercollegiate Studies Institute (which operates the Collegiate Network)
* Judicial Watch
* Landmark Legal Foundation
* Media Research Center (headed by Brent Bozell)
* Pacific Legal Foundation
* Pittsburgh World Affairs Council
* Reason Foundation


No, Poltroon. I'm not going to. You see, your persistent failure to provide evidence supporting any of your wild allegations has robbed you of the right to request evidence from others, and I have better things to do than do your own research for you.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 01:15 pm
Cyclo wrote: No, Poltroon. I'm not going to. You see, your persistent failure to provide evidence supporting any of your wild allegations has robbed you of the right to request evidence from others, and I have better things to do than do your own research for you.

BINGO! And hurrah. LOL
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 08:24 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:

...
No, Poltroon. I'm not going to. You see, your persistent failure to provide evidence supporting any of your wild allegations has robbed you of the right to request evidence from others, and I have better things to do than do your own research for you.

Cycloptichorn

Name calling followed by "I have better things to do than do your own research for you" is your typical response when you discover you made a false claim.

OK then, you admit (in your own tortured way) that George Soros donated far more money to political candidates and campaign groups than did Richard Mellon-Scaife.

Quote:

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=poltroon&x=20&y=6

Main Entry: 1pol•troon Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: päl. trün
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -s
Etymology: Middle French poultron, from Old Italian poltrone, aug. of poltro colt, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin pullitrus (whence Late Latin polletrus), irregular from Latin pullus young of an animal -- more at FOAL
: a spiritless coward : a mean-spirited wretch : CRAVEN, DASTARD <lily>
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 08:44 pm
In 2006, Bob Perry is the largest contributor with:

Bob Perry
2006 Election Cycle


Recipient
Total Contributions

Economic Freedom Fund
$5,000,000

Americans for Honesty on Issues
$3,000,000

Free Enterprise Fund Cmte
$1,000,000

Free Enterprise Committee
$400,000

College Republican National Cmte
$200,000

Club for Growth
$150,000
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 08:48 pm
Decidedly, all republican organizations.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 08:52 pm
Quote:


OK then, you admit (in your own tortured way) that George Soros donated far more money to political candidates and campaign groups than did Richard Mellon-Scaife.


Naturally, I admitted nothing of the sort.

Thanks for playing, though

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 09:07 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
In 2006, Bob Perry is the largest contributor with:

Bob Perry
2006 Election Cycle


Recipient
Total Contributions

Economic Freedom Fund
$5,000,000

Americans for Honesty on Issues
$3,000,000

Free Enterprise Fund Cmte
$1,000,000

Free Enterprise Committee
$400,000

College Republican National Cmte
$200,000

Club for Growth
$150,000

I'll ask you the same kind of question I asked Cyclo (which he refused to answer). Which of these organizations has contributed to political candidates and/or political campaign groups?

I think the answer in the case of those organizations to which Perry has contributed is: none of them has contributed to political candidates and/or political campaign groups!

But George Soros has contributed millions to political candidates and/or political campaign groups.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 09:31 pm
Oooh, Jim Gibbons of Nevada is a, yes, a republican.

http://www.economicfreedomfund.com/NV_Gibbons4.pdf
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 May, 2007 09:34 pm
Jim Gibbons for Governor of NevadaRepublican candidate for Governor of Nevada.www.gibbonsfornevada.com/ - 3k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2007 05:45 am
Quote:
Iraq Facing `Many' Civil Wars, Country `Fractured,' Report Says

By Robin Stringer

May 17 (Bloomberg) -- Iraq is facing several civil wars between a number of rival communities struggling for power and has ``fractured'' into regional power bases, a report by an adviser to the U.K. government said.

There are ``many civil wars and insurgencies,'' and the Middle Eastern country has fractured into ``regions dominated by sectarian, ethnic or tribal political groupings,'' said a report released today by Chatham House, a London-based international affairs organization which advises European governments, including Britain.

Iraq's ethnic and sectarian communities include minority Sunni Muslims, majority Shiites, Kurds and Turkmen. Some 1,500 civilians were killed in April, the report said, citing official Iraqi statistics. The U.S. military is deploying about 30,000 additional forces to Baghdad and surrounding areas in an attempt to quell rampant violence in the country.

This year will be ``a particularly crucial period,'' as many of the ``most destabilizing issues,'' including an oil revenue sharing law, federalism and the territorial borders of the autonomous Kurdish region in the north of the country, are due to be resolved, said the report, titled ``Accepting Realities in Iraq.''

The U.S. and U.K., the main military partners in a coalition that invaded Iraq in March 2003, ``continue to struggle'' in their analysis of the country's political and social structures, said Gareth Stansfield, author of the report.

``This analytical failing has led to the pursuit of strategies that suit ideal depictions of how Iraq should look, but are often unrepresentative of the current situation,'' Stansfield said in the report.

Control of the State
In Baghdad, Sunni and Shiite groups are fighting for control of the state. There is a ``rapidly emerging conflict'' between Kurds and non-Kurds in the northern oil hub of Kirkuk, where the majority of the population is Kurdish, Stansfield said.

Tribal Sunni groups are clashing with fighters loyal to al- Qaeda in the western province of al-Anbar. In the south, Shiite groups are fighting for control over Basra, the oil-rich city near the Iranian border, Stansfield said. Anti-U.S. Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia, which is Iraqi nationalist and opposed to federalism, is coming into conflict with other Shiite groups, such as the Badr militia, that have close ties with Iran.

In addition, Sunni insurgents are fighting U.S. forces in the country's north and center, and Shiite militiamen are attacking U.K. forces in the south of the country around Basra, the report said.

Civilian Deaths
At least 63,000 civilians have been killed in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion, according to the Iraqi Body Count Web site, which tracks media reports of civilian deaths. This may be a conservative total; the United Nations said in January that at least 34,000 civilians were killed around the country last year alone.

U.S. military deaths have risen every month since the intensified security efforts began in February. At least 49 U.S. soldiers have been killed this month, according to Department of Defense statistics. Some 148 U.K. service members have been killed since the invasion.

Stansfield recommends the better inclusion of Sunni representatives and al-Sadr, who has widespread support in the south and Baghdad, in the political process, and backing for Kurdish hopes of a formally autonomous state in the north of the country.

``Iraq must become federal if it is to survive, quite simply because there is no other way to ensure that the Kurds will peacefully remain within the state,'' Stansfield said.

A centralized Iraqi government has resulted in a ``zero-sum competition for power'' and the country instead needs regional arrangements, the report said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Robin Stringer in London at [email protected] .

Last Updated: May 16, 2007 19:34 EDT

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aADVO9PaZXCU&refer=home
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2007 06:03 am
Quote:
Iraq is on the verge of collapse - report
17 May 2007 11:23:00 GMT
Source: Reuters REUTERS/Ceerwan Aziz
By Ibon Villelabeitia

BAGHDAD, May 17 (Reuters) - Iraq's government has lost control of vast areas to powerful local factions and the country is on the verge of collapse and fragmentation, a leading British think-tank said on Thursday.

Chatham House also said there was not one civil war in Iraq, but "several civil wars" between rival communities, and accused Iraq's main neighbours -- Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey -- of having reasons "for seeing the instability there continue".

"It can be argued that Iraq is on the verge of being a failed state which faces the distinct possibility of collapse and fragmentation," it said in a report.

"The Iraqi government is not able to exert authority evenly or effectively over the country. Across huge swathes of territory, it is largely irrelevant in terms of ordering social, economic and political life."

The report also said that a U.S.-backed security crackdown in Baghdad launched in February has failed to reduce overall violence across the country, as insurgent groups have just shifted their activities outside the capital.

While cautioning that Iraq might not ultimately exist as a united entity, the 12-page report said a draft law to distribute Iraq's oil wealth equitably among Sunni Arabs, Shi'ites and ethnic Kurds was "the key to ensuring Iraq's survival".

"It will be oil revenue that keeps the state together rather than any attempt to build a coherent national project in the short term," the influential think-tank said.

The oil law, among benchmarks Washington has set Baghdad as critical steps to end sectarian violence, has yet to be approved by parliament. Ethnic Kurds, whose autonomous Kurdistan region holds large unproven reserves, oppose the draft's wording.

Rather that one civil war pitting majority Shi'ites against Sunnis nationwide, the paper said Iraq's "cross-cutting conflicts" were driven by power struggles between sectarian, ethnic and tribal groups with differing regional, political and ideological goals as they compete for the country's resources.

The author of the report, Middle East expert Gareth Stansfield, said instability in Iraq was "not necessarily contrary to the interests" of Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

"(Iraq) is now a theatre in which Iran can 'fight' the U.S. without doing so openly," Stansfield said, adding that Iran was the "most capable foreign power" in Iraq in terms of influencing future events, more so than the United States.

The rise to power of Iraq's long-oppressed Shi'ite majority has caused concern in Sunni Gulf states, particularly Saudi Arabia, which deeply distrusts non-Arab, Shi'ite Iran's influence in Iraq, Stansfield wrote.

Should a U.S. withdrawal herald the beginning of a full-scale Sunni-Shi'ite civil war in Iraq, Saudi Arabia "might not stand by", the paper said, "with the possibility of Iran and Saudi Arabia fighting each other through proxies in Iraq".


http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/B597022.htm
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2007 10:27 am
xingu, That's what I've been saying all along; the Iraqi government has no influence or power - only the thread support from Bushco who ignores everything else to bring "democracy" to a broken country.

The other "tale" from Bush is, if we don't fight them there, we'll have to fight them here in the US.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2007 02:28 pm
Bush rejected a timetable for Iraq. It's "stay the course." He knows he can't get the Iraqi governmen to comply with "anything." He'd rather sacrifice our military and treasure than to admit defeat; an obvious conclusion by the increased violence. There's no way in hell 30,000 more troops are going to change anything in Iraq, except get more of them killed and maimed.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 May, 2007 08:11 pm
From the NYTimes.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 May, 2007 11:42 am
Why the "surge" will not work.

Gunmen dressed as Iraqi soldiers kill 15

By ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 29 minutes ago



BAGHDAD - Gunmen wearing Iraqi army uniforms shot and killed 15 men Saturday in a Kurdish Shiite village northeast of Baghdad and a U.S. soldier was killed and another seriously wounded while searching for three comrades missing for a week after an ambush.

In Baghdad, at least three mortar shells or rockets slammed into the Green Zone after British Prime Minister Tony Blair had arrived for talks with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other Iraqi leaders. One person was injured, but it was unclear how far Blair was from the blasts.

The attack against the villagers occurred early Saturday when gunmen wearing army uniforms entered the village of Hamid Shifi, about 60 miles northeast of Baghdad. They rousted families from their homes and opened fire on the men, killing 15 of them, an Iraqi general and a Kurdish political party said.

The victims were Kurdish Shiites, according to a statement posted on the Web site of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.

The village is located in Diyala province where violence has risen sharply in the past six months.

Also Saturday, the U.S. command reported five more American soldiers were killed, all but one the day before. One soldier was killed Saturday by a roadside bomb south of Baghdad, the military said.

The others
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 May, 2007 02:01 pm
Interview with the BBC:

The former US President Jimmy Carter lambasted Tony Blair for his "blind " support of the Iraq war today, saying it had been a "major tragedy for the world".

…"I think that the almost undeviating support by Great Britain for the ill-advised policies of President Bush in Iraq have been a major tragedy for the world."
Mr Carter condemned the war as "unjustified", and said it had caused "deep schisms" around the globe.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article2560259.ece
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 May, 2007 02:14 pm
Hi McT, You wouldn't know it by those devout supporters of Bush - even with all the evidence of the wide-spread terrorism repeated by all the media around the world, and the splinter created with most of our allies.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 May, 2007 02:20 pm
Bush says "no time frame." Ever wonder why?


U.S. Embassy in Iraq to be biggest everThe complex quickly could become a white elephant if the U.S. scales back its presence and ambitions in Iraq. Although the U.S. probably will have forces in Iraq for years to come, it is not clear how much of the traditional work of diplomacy can proceed amid the violence and what the future holds for Iraq's government.
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 07/29/2025 at 07:32:02