Posted on 06/15/2006 4:01:18 AM PDT by NJRighty
June 15, 2006 -- WHO'D have thought it possible even a month ago? President Bush is getting his mojo back.
The president just had the best week of his second term, perhaps of his entire presidency - and the end of the investigation of Karl Rove, which would have been the headline grabber not long ago, had little to do with it.
Instead, the president's brilliantly conceived and executed trip to Baghdad - giving exactly the right boost at the right time to new Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki - capped off seven days that included the forming of a full Iraqi Cabinet and the success of the U.S. military in locating, bombing and killing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the sadistic Jordanian-born insurgency leader that Osama bin Laden once called the "prince of Iraq."
Equally significant, the night Zarqawi died, American forces staged 17 raids on insurgent targets. By Monday, they had launched 140 more. On the day of the president's visit, 75,000 troops fanned out over Baghdad, ordered to clear the Iraqi capital of the violence and anarchy that has plagued it for months.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
You don't get enough credit, Allegra. Thank you for doing the work you do, and for keeping us informed of how things are really going. Your posts have been very important to me over the last couple of years, and I am sincerely grateful.
Beats me. And listen, just to emphasise (as if anyone cares), things are progressing in Iraq. The full gubmint is extremely good progress. The trip was fine. I just doubt that is has much to do with GW's better fortunes. I could be wrong, it's just my opinion. I thought the secret trip def. showed his committment, but don't we all know about that already? We know GW won't cut and run. We know he has resolve. We know he'll stick it out. Does anyone doubt that? So what's new? The existence of the full gubmint over there is new, and the trip helped highlight that fact, so to that extent it was good. But it's still a very dangerous place over there. Oooh, weird aside, I just realized last nite I dreamed I was in Iraq.
Definately some moves in the right direction. Hope he keeps it up.
Hello there? Who are you? A Liberal? Mexican?
Yeah, I realize 06 is far enough away as it is. I'm just visualizing what success in Iraq will look like 2 more years down the road, and how it will hopefully be the death knell for the DEM party for good. How would they recover after their shameful behavior during wartime? Your point about Iran is a very good one, though. Hard to say how that will impact things, except that no one in their right mind would trust DEMs with national security. Kerry et al are truly laughable. Did you see the other days Kerry said "you can't have it both ways" on Iraq? He should know!
The point is, regardless of what happens on our side, the Dems are, in terms of national security, a non-factor. The only question is whether we make oursleves a non-factor by nominating a McLame or simlilar weak candidate.
However, charisma is a funny thing. This is the land of American Idol. A real dud GOPer could be bad news, it's true. I truly don't think George Allen has the right stuff, but we'll see. On the DEM side, I don't think Shrillary has a prayer and no one's going to convince me otherwise. So far, I think Mark Warner looks like their best hope.
I know it's eons away in political time, but any ideas who might win on the GOP side? Do you think Newt has any chance, or is he permanently soiled? I personally would be troubled by a Newt nomination. Then again, I don't see anyone out there who looks like a proven leader.
I plan on sticking it out a little longer. This is what I've been waiting for.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I think we're witnessing the beginning of the end of this war.
Actually, I said that about two months ago based on changes I was seeing, but most people just laughed at me and accused me of seeing the world through rose-colored glasses.
I may have that last laugh and I'm not above gloaating a little. LOL
That's the problem. It's "your view". You see the glass half-empty, rather than seeing correctly, that the glass just filled up and overflowed.
Allegra, have you had time to get a feel for how President Bush's trip to Iraq is being viewed by the Iraqis themselves? I thought it was a masterful stroke on his part, and I hope and believe that it will result in tangible benefits on many different levels.
As one example, the scene where Prime Minister Maliki touches his heart as a gesture of respect. Our MSM has studiously avoided giving that visual much play, but is it being shown in Iraq?
Newt is right on almost all the positions . . . but he has that character thing regarding his wife's death. Now, Rudy is no saint, but contrary to Newt, he has NEVER campaigned as a moralist. I think you're right about both McLame and Allen.
I still think we haven't seen the GOP nominee yet.
Don't be clueless. This article was about the positive things that are happening. ONLY A WHINER AND COMPLAINER would respond with "Yea BUT..."
"Well sir, you've just won a big bag of GOLD!"
"Yea BUT does that mean I'll now have to buy a wheelbarrow to get it home. I don't like that. Whahhh..."
unless i misunderstood your former post you were commenting about how his going to iraq helped to expose the instability. my question simply was meant to point out that at least bush actually GOES to iraq. if i was wrong i meant no offense.
Kinda like when someone calls into Hannity as a "life-long Republican"...
I can see how you would say that, but I don't think it's really the case. I think the positives are that a new gubmint is now fully in place. They are taking a much more active role now. More and more news reports come out from THEM about goings on, not from us, which is excellent. So far much has been accomplished. In 2004 America averted disaster by reelecting a president who is serious about foreign policy, a man who can withstand a constant daily pummelling and stay the course. Big time kudos to him and to the ppl who reelected him. All of this is excellent and crucial. Don't get me wrong.
I just think the media is misreading events. They are in a media bubble. To them, the trip was a clever political ploy. A photo op. A scheme to gain political points. Maybe so, but I don't think so. And I truly don't think it is much of a factor in whatever poll surge GW is experiencing. I could be wrong. I think getting Zarq and getting the new gubmint in place is what made the difference. The trip is merely underlining those points. On the downside, Iraq is still a very dangerous place, as GW emphasized in the Rose Garden. The next step will be for Iraqis to stand up and do something about it. Once that happens, the DEM party position on Iraq will be decimated once and for all.
No you were fine. I think I made myself sound more negative than I am. GWB is a solid leader, and the trip to Iraq probably does accrue some benefit to him by highlighting that fact.
Didn't Guliani have marital issues as well?
The Iraqis seemed pretty excited to have our leader visiting their leaders. It gave them a good morale boost and a feeling of esteem. National pride is very evident here these days as well.
Things have really been looking up over the past few days.
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.