Posted on 07/27/2006 5:46:22 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
Conservative national security allies of President Bush are in revolt against Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, saying that she is incompetent and has reversed the administration’s national security and foreign policy agenda.
The conservatives, who include Newt Gingrich, Richard Perle and leading current and former members of the Pentagon and National Security Council, have urged the president to transfer Miss Rice out of the State Department and to an advisory role. They said Miss Rice, stemming from her lack of understanding of the Middle East, has misled the president on Iran and the Arab-Israeli conflict.
(Excerpt) Read more at insightmag.com ...
In fact, I think this is required of her. If the democrats retake the Senate, she would be conferring with Biden or whoever ended up being the Chairman. Will we see articles about her conferring with democrats?
Feh.
Gosh, you mean he finally can't find another concubine?
Sorry to be crude, but he has NO credibility, nor chance of being taken seriously about ANYTHING.
His time was up long ago.
I'll leave it up to the Mods, but I'm not going to request it's removal because of some of the nastiness that I'm seeing expressed here toward accidental double posting. AND if you check the links, you'll see that my title is the SAME as the article's title AND I did find it via Drudge. So, I don't believe that I did anything wrong and do think that all of this is really uncalled for...
I think giving up Gaza was a proof-of-concept that was known to fail before it started. Give it to the Pali's and it'll become a ghetto. Boom. Just like they said.
Israel will end up taking it back. But it had to be given up in order for the demonstration to be effective.
Sometimes you have to think in three dimensions, not just two.
Before you make those kinds of accusations, bub, I strongly suggest that you check my posting history. Just because I don't like Condi does NOT mean that I'm a troll.
What's wrong with you?
"Nastiness"? Yes, you certainly ARE nasty.
Not a big fan of the "New Newt"...
A pretty good historian and someone capable of putting 2 +2 together and getting the correct answer, but his renewed desire to be currently relevant and a political force in the future has clouded his ability for rational analysis.
That said, I've also been saying from the first few weeks of Condi's taking over as SoS that she is NOT a friend of Israel. ... To the point that I'm begining to wonder if President Bush is a true friend of Israel either...
I have a feeling that BOTH of them consider then Israel to be an obstacle for their own plans for the region rather than a real friend and ally. And that the only reason that they aren't demanding that Israel quit immediately is because taking out Hezbollah would advance the Bush Agenda for the middle east; not because it is the right thing for Israel to do for their own survival.
(Thats not to say that I think that the Bush Agenda for the M.E. is a bad idea.)
Could be wrong about the above, but that is a feeling I have had for well over a year.
I'm not a "bub." I'm a woman. And I don't like your opinion re Condi Rice. You don't like? Tough!
Nobody's playing victim here, bub! But my point is, I did not know about the first posting despite the search function, and I think that you are really out of line here. if you don't like the accidental double posting, then I suggest that you go read another thread. Have you stopped to think that there might be a lot of other folks out there who also did not know about the first posting?
Does this apply to Israel as well to expell terror ? Evidently not. Condi does not represent Israel, nor should she open her pie hole to represent Israel. Israel speaks for herself. It is a Nation, a valid Nation, and Mrs. Rice needs to STAND DOWN.
So, differing opinions are not allowed on Free Republic, ma'am? Is that what you're saying?
Diplomacy is always a matter of tact and dissemblement. Condi is fine IMHO.
Well, almost always. Here's a tale of a good ol' American diplomat to cheer you up. I posted it on the other thread too Of course he was relieved of his post...
"WILLIAM EATON... was appointed, in 1797, consul to Tunis. Besides attending to the ordinary duties of consul, he was authorized, in connection with the consuls of Algiers and Tripoli, to alter a treaty which a Frenchman by the name of Famin- acting as United States agent- had made with the Bey of Tunis.
...he horsewhipped Famin in the public streets"
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:15fYPpclBlgJ:memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r%3Fammem/ncps:%40field(DOCID%2B%40lit(ABK4014-0021-73))::+horsewhipped+Algiers&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=12
Sure had a grasp of how to handle French "allies".
Agreed.
Wouldn't you be happier over at Lew Rockwell's website?
That's an awful big statement for someone to make while sitting safely a long way away behind his or her keyboard.
The liberals tried to bring down Bush, and failed. They tried to bring down cheney, and failed. Then they went after Rumsfeld, Rove, and Libby. They failed. Now they want to bring down Condi. With a pattern like that, do you really wonder why we doubt your intentions?
*Snicker*
Simmer down... please...
Condi hasn't said anything that threatens Israel. Diplospeak is just that. Nobody is getting in Israel's way, and that's a good thing.
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.