'Today' continued this morning its campaign of promoting the Baker-Hamilton recommendations. Chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell left little doubt as to her inclinations with this mini-editorial in the guise of a report:Posted on 12/01/2006 5:06:26 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
'Today' continued this morning its campaign of promoting the Baker-Hamilton recommendations. Chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell left little doubt as to her inclinations with this mini-editorial in the guise of a report:
"Americans might well be asking today after all the high-profile summits this week on two continents 'is the administration any closer now to an exit strategy for Iraq?'"
Noting that "time is running out and options limited," Mitchell wanted to know whether President Bush is "ready to change policy before events overtake him?" She then launched into a description of the policy changes to be proposed by the Baker-Hamilton Study Group.
View video here.
Even the retreat the Baker group proposes isn't quick enough for some. Noting that the study group's recommendation would result in all combat troops being out of Iraq by 2008, Mitchell closed by observing: "leading Democrats are already saying it is not fast enough."
Aside: Michelle Kosinski later reported from London on the investigation into the poisoning of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko. I don't know about you, but I think it's still a bit early for NBC to bring Michelle back holding an umbrella. Inevitably invokes memories of this ;-)
Finkelstein recently returned from Iraq. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
Andrea advocates for Baker-Hamilton ping.
He should stick to his guns as long as he is in office and bring Iraq as far along as possible in that time, while killing as many of the terrorist as possible at the same time before the next Presidential election. My bet is that the harder he fights and the more success he sees, the more likely that the democrats will not take the White House. The harder he sticks to those guns the less likely it will be...the more equivoction and softening he does, the more likely it will be.
The dems and libs know this and that is why they continue to push the issue.
These people are like dripping water torture! We are not looking for an exit strategy! We are looking to stablize Iraq and have a democracy thriving in the Middle East.
so right you are. I agree.
He won't.
bring Iraq as far along as possible in that time
We're just about there my friend.
while killing as many of the terrorist as possible at the same time before the next Presidential election
He refuses to strike at the source of the problem. That source is in Riyadh with satellite offices in Damascus and Tehran.
My bet is that the harder he fights and the more success he sees, the more likely that the democrats will not take the White House
Watch for the old rope-a-dope. This is going to be Viet Nam redux.
L
"Who cares what Andrea and Today thinks?"
I do, because millions of Americans continue to watch them every day for news and views.
I think it is a pretentious affectation, and smells of social experimentation.
But, then, I am from Massachusetts, and am overly allergic to local types, so I could be wrong.
Lord Gorzaloon Standish-Cabot-Waspwell III.
LOL everytime I see Michelle Kosinski, especially with an umbrella. I've gotta think she's cozy with some NBC honcho, or she wouldn't have survived her Canoe Snafu, much less been promoted to doing serious news stories.
The link to Michelle and what I presume is the canoe incident isn't working.
Sorry about that. Here's a working link to Michelle's Canoe-gate:
http://newsbusters.org/node/2199
To the contrary, if you look at a map, Iraq is at the epicenter of those three locations.
That's why the neocon strategy is still brilliant IMO.
We should be increasing the chaos in Iraq because that giant sucking sound is terrorists being drawn into the Iraqi blender.
And the civil war vortex in Iraq will eventually grow and swallow all of its neighbors.
I can't wait for the 12th Imam to re-appear.
BUMP
"I disregard what people with hyphenated names have to say.
I think it is a pretentious affectation, and smells of social experimentation."
That's funny, and I agree totally with you. I have to wonder about people with hyphenated names. We got a guy here at work that married some air head and he changed his name to be hyphenated. What an idiot.
Thanks for newsbusters. It's an excellent site. And thanks for posting pieces of it here.
What ever happened to the novel idea of actually completing the mission after defeating the enemy?
We occupied Germany after WW2 dispite token resistance, which could be exactly what is happening in Iraq.
the only difference......Germany was tired of their people dying for a futile cause. Iraqi citizens still have a lot to prove by stopping the killing of their people by foreign terrorists.
Iran and Syria are probably killing the Iraqi people.
So their sacrifices are minimal if they can dictate the politics of the conflict. They do not want a western leaning Iraq. Iran's Adolph Adjimijihad is clearly undermining a peaceful Iraq.
"This is going to be Viet Nam redux."
Watch on Al Jezerra the triumphant march into Baghdad by hezbollah and irans republican guard as America hurridly evacuates the Green Zone, leaving behind pro western Iraqis who will be slaughtered.
Timeline, March 2009 if not sooner.
Yup
The leftist media has placed all their eggs in the Iraq basket. They will do whatever it takes to not let us declare victory. Any and all bad news is pounced on and trumpeted as loud as possible. Any good news, well there is none according to them. Even CSPAN has become a useful tool of propaganda.
Is this an entirely unfair question? President Bush has less than 2 years to make Iraq work. In that time, he faces domestic pressures that will try and force his hand, and an al-Sadr backed Iraqi PM who intends on taking over security issues come mid 2007. Given how long an endeavor this is looking to be, and the speed of which events are overtaking him, I think it's reasonable to ask if President Bush can adapt to what's going on faster than his opponents.
Could Andrea Mitchell be any more annoying? I hear her voice and it's like fingernails onn a blackboard. I appreciate you distilling down Andrea's "Bushhate" screeds to a few paragraphs...I certainly can't watch her.
IIRC .. doesn't it also say .. depending on conditions on the ground??
My pleasure, stm. I was, you might say, "drafted" from FR by NewsBusters when it started up and am still a loyal FReeper.
Social Engineering
Who cares what Andrea and Today thinks? >>>>
Better question is...who cares what the "Iraqi Panel" has to say? None of them are on the battlefield in Iraq so they should STFU.
In days, if not weeks, and certainly not years, no one will give a tinker's damn what some talking head in the media nor a bunch of washed up political hacks say, think, or report.
History will judge our leaders by what they actually have done.
This is what counts.
They want us to get out because they know we're close to turning the corner.
They can't have a Bush victory in Iraq now. It would be bad for their plans for power.
How many on the Baker-Hamilton board served in the military?
Is that a neck or dried ostrich skin??????????? Excuse me while I vomit!
"I think it's reasonable to ask if President Bush can adapt to what's going on faster than his opponents."
- The only "adapting" that Bush can do in the short term is to declare that the US has lost the war and cut and run. The course that Bush has set and repeated over and over until blue in the face is that he is committed to winning the war. in this decision he must be patient until the Iraqi's build up their own security forces to take over most roles.
That is his policy and his exit strategy rolled into one, so how critics can continue to argue that there is no exit strategy is beyond me.
After all, the US still has forces tied down in Bosnia a decade after Clinton started his "Monica Diversion" adventure over there and I never hear anyone complain about his lack of an "exit strategy" in that undertaking.
Our inevitable defeat in Iraq already is firmly and irrevocably ingrained into the American psyche. Most Americans fully comprehend and indeed embrace the consequences of our defeat. We need an exit strategy that goes something like this:
(1) convince some terrorist organization (the Iraqi army) to roam Iraq and kill all enemy propagandists (journalists) and the terrorists with whom they hang;
(2) build a thriving stable democracy in Iraq;
(3) beat a retreat to Tehran, accidentally discharging weapons at the enemies of the United States there, including all mad ayatollahs and terrorists; and
(4) offer to surrender to their smoldering corpses.
Granted my sample set may be a bit biased, but the Amercans I checked with want us to kill the enemy and win things in Iraq. The phrase 'exit strategy' didn't even come up!
Exit strategy, redeployment, civil war..... They keep repeating these things ad infinitum then they'll go out and take a poll on these questions, and voila! The 'majority of American people think a definite exit strategy for the redployment of our troops out of the civil war in Iraq is necessary'. BS making of the news and then looking for agreement from the 'people'.
When is that hag Mitchell gonna be fired?
NO!!!!
Never mind Michele, who is Mitchell 'satisfying' to keep her job?
And that's a frightening thought!
That's not even remotely true. President Bush has many options that he simply chooses not to exercise. The 'stay the course' versus 'cut and run' is a false dichotomy. Take the resig-firing of Rumsfeld, for instance. He could have resig-fired Rummy years ago, and adapted only after the loss in the elections.
I'm just guessing, but I think when the shelf life of former babes (like Andrea Mitchell), approaches expiration, it's more important who you got the goods on, rather than who you're cozying up to.
"Senior NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell said ... that she "messed up" when she told an interviewer in 2003 that Valerie Plame's CIA identity was "widely known."But despite the startling comment, Mitchell said she [has never to date] been contacted by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald.
....Radio host Don Imus grilled Mitchell on her Oct. 2003 remarks, where she told CNBC's Alan Murray that Plame's CIA connection was "widely known among those of us who cover the intelligence community and who were actively engaged in trying to track down who among the foreign service community was the envoy to Niger."
Andrea is an ugly old liberal.
The point being, the US could accomplish any number of useful outcomes under this scenario.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.