Skip to comments.Bush Reaction to Report Worries Father's Aides
Posted on 12/08/2006 10:27:04 AM PST by jmc1969
Former White House advisers to George H.W. Bush are keenly disappointed and concerned about the current President Bush's initial reaction to the report by the Iraq Study Group.
They consider him rather dismissive of the group's conclusions, issued yesterday, which include the view that current Iraq policy is failing. The group recommends a variety of important changes, such as assigning U.S. troops to play more of an advisory and training role and less of a combat role. The ISG also recommends that the United States withdraw most of its combat brigades by early 2008 and that the administration increase diplomatic efforts, including starting talks with Iran and Syria and energetically working toward an Israeli-Palestinian solution.
Adding to the unease were President Bush's comments at his Thursday news conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in which he avoided commenting on specifics in the ISG report.
"We have a classic case of circling the wagons," says a former adviser to Bush the elder. "If President Bush changes his policy in Iraq in a fundamental way, it undermines the whole premise of his presidency. I just don't believe he will ever do that."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
What an @$$hole and a coward! Sure, just throw the President under the bus, and support the Surrender Monkeys, anonymously!
And W is the dumb one, right? Most of the groups conclusions are dumb and utter garbage. W is right to be dismissive.
If these clowns are keenly disappointed, then I'm keenly satisfied.
So sad, too bad...
He should have used it to clean up after Barney..........
Maybe because he knows they are junk.
Best news I have read in a few days! ;-)
Well, I'LL be disappointed if he follows their suggestion of talking to the Iranians and Syrians.
Theres even enough of it for Mrs. Beasley and the kitty!
W is one of the few that see the dark clouds on the horizon.
And the problem with this is ???
How the hell did we survive 88-92 with so many of these clowns in charge?
My take is that Papa Buss invalidated some of the REALLY REALLY bad policies.
He was POTUS after all.
More worrisome, though, is the attitude implicit in the report that the "Missouri Compromise" will continue to work to keep America safe ~
History will show that W was the last president that had a pair.
And most of Poppy's greedy old cowardly Saudi lackeys are in their twilight years and probably don't care much about what things will be like 10-20 years down the road.
They have little or nothing to offer in the way of worthwhile advice for how we're going to deal with this problem. They did a lot to contribute to the problem in the first place.
GHWB, crawl back into the shadow of your son, who, hopefully, will NOT be distracted by James Baker, Globalist lawyer to the Saudi Dubais, and Lee Hamilton, a pompous self-important nincompoop.
As well he should be, considering many of those conclusions would've made even Neville Chamberlain blush.
This isn't "circling the wagons". It is politely ignoring the ravings of a pack of lunatics. You don't even have to go past the executive summary of the report to see that the the ten wise guys had to be drunk when they wrote it.
That's a joke headline right? No one would really write a headline like that would they?
This story is as silly as The Report.
Here is the King is thinking about stopping payment on his check to James Baker. He thinks that maybe the money is better spent killing more Americans.
So if the President doesn't play ball and "see the light" will daddy's "former White House advisers" arrange for him to wake up to a political horse's head in his bed?
"Also, I call your attention to these brilliant Panel Recommendations:
#34: Wash your hands after going to the toilet.
#56: Don't walk into traffic with your eyes closed.
#71: Never deep fry a turkey indoors.
Funny, I find President Bush's reaction to these appeasers to be immeasurably reassuring.
Let's see. Would these be the same "former aides" who advised the elder Bush to turn back before taking Baghdad in the previous Gulf War?
There's nothing wrong with talking to the Syrians. We DO have an embassy there for a reason. The fact that it would be futile should be considered.
There is no reason to talk to the Iranians. It's as much in our national interest to attack them as it was to invade Iraq. What we don't have is a series of UN resolutions giving us diplomatic cover, for what it's worth, for doing so.
Talk ain't gonna help.
#48 Eat 3 servings of leafy green vegetables every day
Hmmmm, could that be James Baker???
Jim Baker himself, I would guess, miffed that the stubborn young Bush just won't throw the Jews under the bus and get on with the Big Boys' plan. I believe there are powerful elements in our foreign service bureaucracy and within the intelligence services that have convinced themselves that the Arabs can effectively be bought off by sacrificing Israel. They don't believe that radical Islam has any claim against the West that can't be satisfied by turning the State of Israel into the People's Islamic Republic of Palestine, while withdrawing from Iraq and from the whole ugly "war on terror" thing while we're at it. The loonies will just shoot their AK-47's wildly in the air for a month or so and then go on about their business. Right.
Best line I heard about this came from Jonah Goldberg. "Washington is a city where it is better to be wrong in a group than right by yourself."
W. does not mind being by himself when that's the right thing.
Actually the King (or the acting King) at the time helped us with the invasion of Iraq, saving American troop lives. Above that, the Sunni King of S.A. is somebody who shares our interest in not having Iraq dominated by Iran.
The problem is the Saudi and Baker attitude toward Israel, which is one of the problems with this stupid report.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
See post 36. Seems I'm not the only one with that idea.
Now, there's a group that Dubya should never listen to.
Look what they did for his daddy.
Since these "former aides" are nameless, the article may just reflect what its author thinks they feel, or wishes they would feel. A useless article, IMHO.
For W to follow the ISG's major recommendations would be like his father violating his No New Taxes pledge.
He isn't right to be dismissive.
He should be openly scornful and heartily rejecting.
The King does not do enough to stop members of "his royal family" and others in Saudi from funding the people that are killing Americans.
Lemme guess, they are never named in the article? Probably Scowlcroft and David Gurgle.
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household." Jesus, Matthew 10:36
There's still a lot of argument on that. Personally I think it's a good thing we didn't take him out.
We either let the region rebuild it (Iran, Syria, Saudi) or we do. The President lost in 92, guess who comes in during rebuilding.
That's right. The reason Balkans is so messed up, worse than Iraq it seems, (now there's a real quagmire), is because we were so uniformly one sided it's embarrassing. See how the PResident, our military, and the Iraqis do it? Anyone who steps out of line gets a uniform @$$whupping. Shia, SUnni, Kurd, other than IRaqi, doesn't matter. That's what we should have done there. But NOOO Serbs bad. Serbs must be punished because we are too lazy to actually find other scumbags on the Croat, ALbanian, and Bosnian side.
IF we are going to rebuild and Bush the elder was the one in the White House in 93, we should have taken Saddam. Otherwise, all betts are off.
I can see the toon now, backing up the Shia as a majority while, telling the others to screw off, and letting the whole of Iraq devolves into civil war.
Of course there'd be a news black out from the Monica wannabes in the DEMONcrap ministry of information and propaganda.
Look, what is really going on is that James Baker and Brent Scowcroft, Daddy's Enforcers, are trying to install Hug-A-Saudi Realism at State. Condi doesn't want to play ball and they want to toss her under the bus.
Unfortunately for the Dictator of the Month Club, W is President.
The Flavor of the Month is to open up a conference with the Boy President and his patron, the Persian Fuhrer. The ISG report opens up a huge bucket o' worms by assuming that Fascists will help us build Iraqi democracy.
Baker was running around yesterday speaking about Syria being "flipped".
No wonder Condi remained silent. She let McCain and Lieberman open up on this nonsense.
Be Seeing You,
We had the entire Iraqi Army in the field during the first war. We could have wiped them out and then had no resistance whatsoever.
Instead in Gulf War 2 we didn't fight the Iraqi Army, we just went into Baghdad and told them all to go home.
The number of troops we had in the first Gulf War was also more then enough to provide security in a country the size of Iraq. The number of troops in the second Gulf War was about half the number needed.
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.