Replies

All I did was translate one of the editorials. They all sound similar. The paper is a nationalist paper.

Whether the President deserves it or not is inconsequential.

Question is do you deserve it..

"All I did was translate one of the editorials. They all sound similar. The paper is a nationalist paper."

I understand that its Mr Civaoglu's views. But I again ask the question: In 1991 were these guys (ie Turk elites) demanding the end to Saddam or encouraging his contiuation in power? I recall the latter, because their fetish over kurdish autonomy made them prefer a brutal Saddam to a free iraqi kurdistan. The Turks cant complain if they got what they asked for.

The President "deserve" it? He bears the burden of mistakes made earlier - Carter's incompetence and bungling in Iran that started the era of anti-US terrorism for real, Reagan and Clinton cut-n-run in Lebanon and Somalia made us look feckless (we were in a way), our "UN=valid" view of military action that boxed us in Gulf War I and gave us Saddam defiant and these failed inspections/sanction for 12 years. And we've been harldy helped by European allies that care more for their saddamite oil deals and power-plays than stopping terror ... all that stirred a stew that led to 9/11.

Bush has the burden of history, but IMHO is not hostage to it. Just watch.

All I did was translate one of the editorials. They all sound similar.

Thanks.