Posted on 01/05/2007 6:58:02 PM PST by neverdem
THE Iraq Study Group report was released into a sea of unrealistic expectations. Inevitably, it disappointed hopes for a clear path through the morass of Iraq, because there is no “silver bullet” solution to the difficulties in which we find ourselves.
But the report accomplished a great deal. It brought together some of America’s best minds across party lines, and it outlined with clarity and precision the key factors at issue in Iraq. In doing so, it helped catalyze the debate about our Iraq policy and crystallize the choices we face. Above all, it emphasized the importance of focusing on American national interests, not only in Iraq but in the region.
However, the report, which calls the situation in Iraq “grave and deteriorating,” does not focus on what could be the most likely outcome of its analysis. Should the Iraqis be unable or unwilling to play the role required of them, the report implies that we would have no choice but to withdraw, and then blame our withdrawal on Iraqi failures. But here the report essentially stops.
An American withdrawal before Iraq can, in the words of the president, “govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself” would be a strategic defeat for American interests, with potentially catastrophic consequences both in the region and beyond. Our opponents would be hugely emboldened, our...
--snip--
As we work our way through this seemingly intractable problem in Iraq, we must constantly remember that this is not just a troublesome issue from which we can walk away if it seems too costly to continue. What is at stake is not only Iraq and the stability of the Middle East, but the global perception of the reliability of the United States as a partner in a deeply troubled world. We cannot afford to fail that test.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
He is Captain Obvious.
He also was a member of that august group of thinkers who allowed islamofascism to flourish for the past 30 years unabetted. Dereliction of duty comes to mind.
It it ever was on our side, it is only because we had a shared aversion to communism.
That statement alone is enough to discredit anything that follows, ideas wallowing in utter stupidity but dressed up in intelligent-sounding, wordy phrases.
The writings of Brent "Hang the Kurds out to dry" Scowcroft are best used as either fishwrap or lining the bottom of a birdcage.
I'm a lot less interested in getting them on our side than I am in putting them in their place.
Follow the money. In a real world you wouldnt criticize someone who gave their time for public service, but that was before the official revolving door was established, and honest folks started taking money from foreign sources and try to peddle their wares. This leads to immediate discredit Im afraid.
Anyone who thinks the "Middle East" has EVER been on "our side" is an incorrigible moron.
They are our mortal enemies - all of them.
The other members of the study group included: Lawrence S. Eagleburger, Vernon E. Jordan, Jr., Edwin Meese III , Sandra Day O'Connor, Leon E. Panetta, William J. Perry, Charles S. Robb, and Alan K. Simpson.
Vernon Jordan? Leon Panetta? Jamie Gorelick was more qualified!
Indeed it did.
The liberal press puffed it up beforehand, so expectations were huge. The left was salivating. They could hardly wait.
Then, when it came out and they had a chance to look at it, it was so far out to lunch that even the moonbats threw up their hands and gave up on it.
Which basically gave President Bush another chance.
I had a buddy at Ft. Benning who was a State Department brat - he grew up in the Middle East. He was convinced that all of the Mohammedeans would love us if we would just abandon Israel. I just laughed at him.
I couldn't care less about their squabbles. All that needs done is to tell Halliburton to get us the oil, no questions asked, and get out of the way.
SUBTITLE:
How I Cover My Tracks and Look Good So I Can Be Appointed To More of These Commissions
-ccm
It's like saying we want the Nazis on our side...
Another name I wish I had never heard again! Are these people coming out of the woodwork now?
I don't know, but what does that have to do with the merits of his article? He obviously appreciates what failure in Iraq will cause to the U.S. and the region. Would a regional war between the Shia and Sunnis be in the interest of the U.S. and oil dependent allies?
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.