Posted on 12/06/2006 9:08:30 PM PST by dennisw
Smug, Arrogant, Insufferable [Bill Bennett]
Ive now read the report, and I cant add much beyond what Andy McCarthy and Rich Lowry have written about its contents and internal contradictions. For a report to identify the outside agitators (which happen to also be the worst terrorist-sponsoring states in the world Iran & Syria) as provid[ing] arms, financial support, and training for Shiite militias within Iraq, i.e., fomenting war, and then say we should negotiate and offer incentives to those countries is simply too much to bear. Insult is added to injury with the absurdity that Iran and Syria then become members of something called the Iraq Support Group. Committeeism simply got out of control here.
But bear this report we have for many months in the making. The denouement of the report may not be, however, the contents themselves (we had a pretty good idea of what was coming) but the behavior of the commissioners and the media.
James Baker opened his thoughts today by saying Iraqis have been liberated from the nightmare of a tyrannical order only to face the nightmare of brutal violence. So much for any moral distinction between a terrorist sponsoring dictatorship and an embattled, weak, effort toward self-government. The distinction between permanent darkness and days of light and darkness both, and a hope for dawn was lost.
Heres what I observed from the press conference and subsequent commentary on cable news.
One reporter got it exactly right in his question: [T]ell me, why should the president give more weight to what you all have said given, as I understand, you went to Iraq once, with the exception of Senator Robb. None of you made it out of the Green Zone. Why should he give your recommendations any more weight than what he's hearing from his commanders on the ground in Iraq?
Who are these commissioners and what is their expertise in Iraq or even foreign policy? Ralph Peters has made the point, Washington insiders pretend to respect our troops but continue to believe that those in uniform are second-raters and that any political hack can design better war plans than those who've dedicated their lives to military service. The entire report is contemptuous of the military, spoken of as pawns on a chess table, barriers, observers, buffers, and trainers. Never as what they are trained to be: the greatest warriors in the world. Would it have been too much to ask that one general, or even one outspoken believer in the mission from the get-go, be on this commission?
Ive heard again and again at the press conference and on subsequent interviews variants of this is how a commission should work in Washington, this has been great bi-partisanship, its too bad we cant operate this way more, if any message is to be sent its the message that five Republicans and five Democrats of goodwill sat down since March and put together a remarkable document.
This is the triumph of the therapeutic, where bipartisanship a hug across the aisle has become a higher value than justice. The crisis of the house divided has been inverted; we no longer are worried about the crisis but the House, the moral, the good, and the just take a backseat to collegiality. Does history really give a hoot about bipartisanship? Who cares whether they are getting along? The task is to do the right thing, especially in war. But, when relativism is the highest value, agreement becomes the highest goal, regardless of right and wrong. And, woe to those who disagree, they will be sent whence they came the outer reaches of extremism. This is the tyranny of the best people todays equivalent of the Cliveden set.
One reporter asked if the president would accept this edict, as if there's force of law here. (the press has bought into the tyranny already). Another asked how hard it would be for the president to give up his power, to take his hands off the wheel. Do we all need a civics lesson? Im tempted to go on about knowledge of American government, but for brevity, can we just say the president is the commander-in-chief and in charge because he is elected by the people.
Perhaps the most systemic problem with the report is it didn't tell us how to win; it answered how to get out. The commissioners answered the wrong question, but it was the one they wanted to answer.
In all my time in Washington I've never seen such smugness, arrogance, or such insufferable moral superiority. Self-congratulatory. Full of itself. Horrible.
Posted at 4:20 PM
"And here we go again...Baker is yet again trying to set Israel up for destruction/annihilation.."
You are absolutely correct, as proven by page 40 of the Iraq Study Group Report:
RECOMMENDATION 15: Concerning Syria, some elements of that negotiated peace should be:
Syrias full adherence to UN Security Council Resolution 1701 of August 2006, which provides the framework for Lebanon to regain sovereign control over its territory.
Syrias full cooperation with all investigations into political assassinations in Lebanon, especially those of Rafik Hariri and Pierre Gemayel.
A verifiable cessation of Syrian aid to Hezbollah and the use of Syrian territory for transshipment of Iranian weapons and aid to Hezbollah. (This step would do much to solve Israels problem with Hezbollah.)
Syrias use of its influence with Hamas and Hezbollah for the release of the captured Israeli Defense Force soldiers.
A verifiable cessation of Syrian efforts to undermine the democratically elected government of Lebanon.
A verifiable cessation of arms shipments from or transiting through Syria for Hamas and other radical Palestinian groups.
A Syrian commitment to help obtain from Hamas an acknowledgment of Israels right to exist.
Greater Syrian efforts to seal its border with Iraq.
RECOMMENDATION 16: In exchange for these actions and in the context of a full and secure peace agreement, the Israelis should return the Golan Heights, with a U.S. security guarantee for Israel that could include an international force on the border, including U.S. troops if requested
by both parties.
RECOMMENDATION 17: Concerning the Palestinian issue, elements of that negotiated peace should include:
Adherence to UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 and to the principle of land for peace, which are the only bases for achieving peace.
Strong support for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority to take the lead in preparing the way for negotiations with Israel.
A major effort to move from the current hostilities by consolidating the cease-fire reached between the Palestinians and the Israelis in November 2006.
Mega-dittoes, Bill Bennett. You've nailed it.
James Baker is always bad news for Israel. But the same man lead the GOP lawyers who preserved Pres George Bush's victory in 2000. James Baker (and his team) beat the Donks at their own game.
He got it right. It's a big mistake to base America's foreign policy on this.
Ca-CHING!!! Another million bucks Bill has sent to the slots!!
Thank YOU, for posting the pertinent bits of this disgusting Baker Israel sellout.
A guy who squandered EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS on SLOT MACHINES???!!!
Be-have.
Haven't said anything that wasn't true.
Heh ... yeah, that too.
They might as well have gotten Pat Buchanan to write the report.
Joe Lieberman re-election pretty much sums up the attitude of most Americans. We are fed up with bipartisanship for the sake of getting along.
Lieberman owes no allegiance to any party. I hope he's able to make a difference in the coming months. There are very hard decisions ahead I just hope the president have strong men and women who can take a stand when necessary.
These idiots think we can play whack-a-mole with a feather.
it won't work.
Thanks for the heads up.
I'll check it out.
I know. It's so unreal actually seeing it happen in this lifetime. Makes you feel kind of queasy, ya know?
CA....
We'll just call that a Christmas wish list that is doubtful to come to pass. Has anything the UN been involved in ever been successful?
Why does it seem that we are confronted with daily confirmations that we're living in the "bizarro world?"
I'm tired of abnormalities being hailed as better than common decency.
Regardless of whether your dire (and unlikely) predictions come true, montag813's comment was dispicable. You may disagree with Baker, but you'd have a hard time convincing me that he hates America, and designed his plan to destroy it. Only something on that level would justify such a sentiment.
You mean he should have given it to the homeless and poor who can't buy milk and cookies?
Doesn't say how many millions he won. Just the losses.
Well .. Lieberman said basically the same thing.
He said that inviting Syria and Iran to help in Iraq is like the fire dept inviting an arsonist to fight the fire.
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.