Posted on 01/13/2005 5:47:14 PM PST by TexKat
WASHINGTON - Former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, an architect of the U.S. war with Iraq (news - web sites) in 1991, is advising the Bush administration to consider a phased withdrawal of some of the 150,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.
Otherwise, Baker says, the United States risks being suspected of having an "imperial design" in the region.
A protracted U.S. military presence in Iraq is probably unavoidable since attacks on U.S.-led coalition forces and on Iraqi security forces are likely to continue, Baker said Tuesday in a speech at Rice University in Houston.
"Even under the best of circumstances, the new Iraqi government will remain extremely vulnerable to internal divisions and external meddling," he said.
Still, former President George H.W. Bush's secretary of state said, "any appearance of a permanent occupation will both undermine domestic support here in the United States and play directly into the hands of those in the Middle East who — however wrongly — suspect us of imperial design."
At the same time, Baker urged the Bush administration to call for a "good-faith effort" by the new Palestinian leadership to crack down on terror groups that target Israel and also "prevail upon Israel" to stop settlement activity in Palestinian areas during any peace talks.
"We should serve, when necessary, as a direct participant in the talks, offering suggestions, brokering compromises and extending assurances," Baker said.
Above all, he said, the administration should make it "unambiguously clear" to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that his projected withdrawal from Gaza should not be part of a design to limit the Palestinians to enclaves.
Seeking peace in the Middle East improves chances of achieving stability in Iraq, said Baker, who helped plan the Persian Gulf war that forced Iraq to reverse its annexation of Kuwait.
"The road to peace doesn't run just through Jerusalem or just through Baghdad," he said. "That is a false choice. Today, it arguably runs through both."
I think the most recent report came a few months before the election. It showed a large WMD program that could be taken quickly to production.
hmmm...didn't think about that. Does Baker have Saudi clients?
Does it occur to anyone else that we wouldn't even be there if Baker et al hadn't screwed the pooch in the first Gulf War? Even a token backing for the Kurd/Shia uprising would have carried the day.
Wed Jan 12, 2005 07:09 PM ET
Charles Duelfer, the CIA special adviser who led the ISG's weapons search, has returned home and is expected next month to issue a final addendum to his September report concluding that prewar Iraq had no WMD stockpiles, officials said.
True
What then? Never leave?
I'm afraid we are not even "kicking" Iraq's butt.
No. Take what we found with us to include all the program information. Make it clear that if any WMDs turn up (at any time) we'll return.
I don't think there's any contention between the two; they play different roles. You can't have your SecDef say something like this. It should come from some éminence grise who is not now part of the Administration. That way it doesn't sound like it's actually part of Administration policy... yet. Baker is perfect.
Go to google.com and type in james baker saudi and read about Baker & Botts and all the other James "F@#K the Jews" Baker Saudi connections.
You really think this is orchestrated kabuki theater? What makes you think so? It'd be comforting to think the Admin's got it under control, but I don't share your faith.
Let's not forget to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities on our way out the door.
I agree.
At a time when there will be little loss of life.
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.