Skip to comments.
Gates's shocking thinking on Iran--The un-Rumsfeld
Jerusalem Post ^
| 12-6-06
Posted on 12/06/2006 3:38:13 PM PST by SJackson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
1
posted on
12/06/2006 3:38:16 PM PST
by
SJackson
To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
2
posted on
12/06/2006 3:39:23 PM PST
by
SJackson
(had to move the national debate from whether to stay the course to how do we start down the path out)
To: SJackson
Did you see how fast they Confirmed him?
3
posted on
12/06/2006 3:40:38 PM PST
by
StoneWall Brigade
(Happy 200th Birthday Robert E. LEE)
To: SJackson
Bush has officially self-destructed by nominating Gates and listening to the Iraq Study Group.
To: Holden Magroin
Bush has officially self-destructed by nominating Gates and listening to the Iraq Study Group. IF he agrees with them, and the Gates appointment and Baker's role makes me think he might, I agree.
5
posted on
12/06/2006 3:41:51 PM PST
by
SJackson
(had to move the national debate from whether to stay the course to how do we start down the path out)
To: StoneWall Brigade
Did you see how fast they Confirmed him?Why wouldn't they?
6
posted on
12/06/2006 3:42:11 PM PST
by
SJackson
(had to move the national debate from whether to stay the course to how do we start down the path out)
To: StoneWall Brigade
"Did you see how fast they Confirmed him?"
Like he was on rails. What's the confounded rush, I wonder?
To: RegulatorCountry
is he the real fall guy? normally when they blo in so quick their exit is the same.
To: RegulatorCountry
What's the confounded rush, I wonder? 'Cause once he's confirmed, Rummy leaves.
9
posted on
12/06/2006 3:47:36 PM PST
by
atomicpossum
(Replies must follow approved guidelines or you will be kill-filed without appeal.)
To: SJackson
10
posted on
12/06/2006 3:49:29 PM PST
by
Gritty
(Our victory in Iraq would be a greater defeat for America than Vietnam-Jihad Jaara, Al Aqsa Brigades)
To: SJackson
It is best to listen with one's "third ear" on this matter. The Democrats have one problem and the Republicans another although they have some mutual interests.
Pelosi took steps to corral and keep in the nutroots antiwar faction of her party by endorsing Murtha for Majority Leader and then not using her influence and power to make this happen. Not a symptom of defeat but of success in blunting the nutrootsers influence.
When the President looked at the election results what was hinted became actual--a divided country in a time of war. Listen again to what Baker et al said. A bipartisan effort at unity is the major theme but with enough criticisms and implied failure to keep the peaceniks and nutroots in the corral again.
When faced with a challenge the President must decide what the overall goal is. He has chosen to win the war. True enough Rummy and Bolton have been thrown under the bus, but they are no longer the nidus of RAT attack. All attacks now must be on the President and this will be harder since it is hard to justify a full fledged defeat in Iraq by a full fledged frontal political assault on POTUS.
A good leader leads. He or she will sometimes make errors, suffer devastating losses but the fact that they are the ones leading should never be forgotten. It is easy to see the mistakes and errors when one does not have to make the life and death decisions the President does.
The President is doing his best to win overseas at the same time he has lost at home. Remember, he has lost not just the antiwar RATS but also a considerable segment of the Pubbie voters including almost all the Objectivists, Libertarians and Paleoconservatives. Not an easy task and I pray he will prevail.
To: shrinkermd
it seems to me that the iraq study group was set up to present a "realist" analysis and set of recommendations. that is why Baker was chosen as head of it.
who set it up? who chose the members?
i am assuming bush wanted political cover to pull out of iraq.
this is very similar to what nixon did with "vietnamization" of the vietnam war: reduce the US army role to that of advisors, and let the locals fight the bad guys. then pull out troops, and declare "peace with honor".
i recently read an article by brent scowcroft claiming that vietnamization would have worked (if the dem congress hadn't sabotaged it), and that we should use the same strategy in iraq.
i think this is what is going on: "iraqization".
there may not be any real alternative--it is hard for a democratic country to fight a war without public support.
12
posted on
12/06/2006 4:57:55 PM PST
by
drhogan
To: drhogan
No "blue ribbon" committees in Washington are to diffuse responsibility and concentrate power. Nothing has changed. POTUS has the power and needs peace at home to wage war in Iraq.
The President is a class act politician and knows the above.
To: drhogan
In respect to Viet Nam my DEROS was 17 May 1969. You are right Nixon pulled the combat troops back and out in 1971. He won the election of 1972 against McGovern by carrying almost every state. I think he lost Mass and DC.
In 1975 the NVA invaded South Viet Nam with tanks. No one had believed the terrain compatible with tanks but they invaded with T 54s which were state-of-the art at that time. The South Vietnamese had M58 tanks retrofitted by Chrysler with flame throwers for city fighting. NO match.
The RAT Senate would not all President Ford to order in air power and then canceled the necessary funds for the South to fight on. A great tragedy and a greater treachery than one could believe by America.
To: shrinkermd
A year ago I might have agreed with you...but every human has their breaking point...I fear GW may have met his.
15
posted on
12/06/2006 5:48:21 PM PST
by
Hildy
("Death plucks my ear and says - LIVE - I am coming.....")
To: Hildy
Perhaps. But I see him as being the prototypic "when the going gets tough, the tough get going" type. More definitively he takes anxiety and anger to blend into a fierce resolve to succeed. It is usually experienced as an emotional high and men at least find it almost addictive. That is why they do crazy dangerous things just for fun.
Good combat pilots and other dangerous occupations are filled with such individuals. They never break but they can be carried out feet first. That is what they will have to do with POTUS. You can shake his demeanor and confidence but not his resolve and joy in the challenge.
To: SJackson
Politicians and consituents who--out of cowardice/selfishness--want to allow a small ally to be overrun by Islamists will eventually find out that Iran's talk about Israel is nothing more than a ruse to divide us. Imagine the political and international scenario, if Israel is overrun.
Such politicians and interests (including market interests) will get my hostility instead of support, when their moment of truth comes. ...Nazis!
17
posted on
12/06/2006 6:05:41 PM PST
by
familyop
(Essayons)
To: SJackson; M. Espinola
On second thought, maybe the whole procession of events will be a blessing in disguise. If Israel further builds and maintains a great nuclear arsenal and anti-ballistic missile defense, Iran will go after its next object of conquest: those who are sending their forces to Lebanon.
18
posted on
12/06/2006 6:37:03 PM PST
by
familyop
(Essayons)
To: shrinkermd
You are exactly right. And the same dummy's who engineered that fiasco and tradgedy are the ones on this committee. A bunch of failures that should have faded away long ago.
If it were up to me, I would pull their govt. pensions and benefits and let them live as paupers for the rest of their lives.
19
posted on
12/06/2006 6:44:06 PM PST
by
Parmy
To: shrinkermd
Dr. Gates probably skated through the confirmation since everybody wanted Rumsfeld out and the incoming Democrat led congress hasn't a realistic solution to the problems we face in Iraq. He has CIA and Nat'l Security Council creds from the first Bush administration and as such is probably pretty savvy of Iraq.
What can we draw on this.....?
He's W's sleeper, held in reserve till needed and the need came on Nov. 7th. Knows the ropes and the players, Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Rice....and James Baker.
Could this appointment be a political coup?
20
posted on
12/06/2006 7:14:02 PM PST
by
BIGLOOK
(Keelhauling is a sensible solution to mutiny.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson