Skip to comments.Fighting to win in Iraq [Stone Cold Must-Read With Revelations of Past Baker Failures]
Posted on 12/03/2006 2:27:57 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
AS SECRETARY of state from 1989 to 1992, James Baker was involved in some of the worst foreign-policy blunders of the first Bush administration.
One such blunder was the stubborn refusal to support independence for the long-subjugated republics of the Soviet Union, culminating in the president's notorious "Chicken Kiev" speech urging Ukrainians to stay in their Soviet cage. Another was the appeasement of Syrian dictator Hafez Assad during the run up to the 1991 Gulf War, when Bush and Baker blessed Syria's brutal occupation of Lebanon in exchange for Assad's acquiescence in the campaign to undo Iraq's occupation of Kuwait.
When Chinese tanks massacred students in Tiananmen Square, Bush declared: "I don't think we ought to judge the whole People's Liberation Army by that terrible incident." When Bosnia was torn apart by violence in 1992, the Bush-Baker reaction was to shrug it off as "a hiccup."
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
I agree .. I wasn't a fan of his when he was Secretary of State
As for 2000 ... He was good at putting together a group of lawyers ..
But IMO .. it was the people that really made a difference ..
it was the conservatives that took to the streets and demanded the doors in FL stay open to the public during the recounting .. No hiding from behind close doors
it was the people who stood and yelled Get out of Cheney's House that made the difference .. and stood on every corner across the country
The media couldn't ignore us .. in fact the media was shocked by it all because conservatives never did that before
Just like they were shocked at the out puring of love at Reagan's funeral
First, no number of troops can stop the sort of violence that is going on in Iraq, and the violence will not be stopped without a legitimate government which includes all sides working together. As far as I can tell, that is not going to happen. Perhaps an American military dictatorship would work, but that is not going to happen either.
Second, the increase in violence is NOT because of the belief that America is going to withdraw, as much as that plays a part.
The violence started the day after mohammed died, when Ali was not made leader. It continues to this day, and will always continue until islam dies, as it must die. In Iraq, you are simply seeing true, authentic mohammed-worship in action. To the shia, sunnis are infidels, and vice-versa. Where there is islam, there is violence, and always be violence, because that is what islam requires, with the promise of eternal sex orgies devoutedly believed by the idiotic jihadis.
It is amazing that even conservative writers do not yet grasp this fact.
Why is everyone so worried about the study group? President Bush isn't going to do what they say. He's going to thank them for their wise council and then go ahead and do what he planned to do all along.
I am not going to sweat a lot of the crap, like the Baker Commission. The fact is we are in a 20 to 100 year war with Islam that isn't going to be changed by anything short of a brutal extermination of Mecca. So, the left can retreat all they want, it means nothing in the long term.
The plan from the beginning was to turn the country over to the people, the problem is, that plan takes time and is a rocky road. I don't think that President Bush expected the media to actually be on the other side, nor did he expect the politicians here in the US to put their success ahead of the country.
As to why he hasn't told us the plan, he has, we just keep expecting things to be resolved faster then they can possibly be resolved. We live in a world of instant gratification and are fighting a war that will require long term resolve.
Too bad our military has been so weakened especially in ground force make up
This is the crux of dissociating good leadership from bad in the midst of a national or international crisis. Responsibilities cannot be abandoned simply because the effort to live up to them is uncomfortable. Great post.
It was a decsion by the Court to albore insisting only certain counties ought to have a recount that sunk his case.
It emboldens our enemies at home and abroad as well.
uncbob:That is true BUT what has he planned all along and why wasn't that explained to the American Public instead of letting the democrats frame the issue
humint: In today's complex communications matrix, grabbing the microphone and keeping an audience's attention is extremely difficult. The expectations of the crowd leave little if any room for leadership. By observation, a free minded citizenry is in fact prone to rejecting authority. My guess as to why we do this its for the sake of building within us a perception of independence. Its not uncommon for smart people to test the waters of dissent. Some never graduate past that phase of their politics. But what if the logical conclusion of a type of dissent is corrosive to freedom in general? If responsibility is not married to freedom in society, anarchy will ensue. To quell anarchy, the same authority that couldnt encourage responsibility will have to restrict freedom to protect the society from itself.
If the POTUS and other influential figures continue to feed into this trend without correcting it, the situation is going to get messy. But what if it cannot be corrected? Leadership will never disappear completely. Play the logic out - if a free citizenry collectively concludes that their independence can only be achieved by rejecting authority for leadership to function, at best it must hide the fact that it is leading at worst, it must be deceptive. To make progress on the economy or national security the POTUS will have to develop a strategy for success and then commit to the exact opposite strategy. In so doing, the public will predictably reject it and independently conclude that the secret strategy of the POTUS is the correct one.
It's something to think about, but not too hard. I'm no conspiracy theorist, so I'll stop here.
I'm one who believes it will eventually stop raining, there are many who think nothing was worth leaving the warmth and comfort of home.
Kids learning to walk fall down, and sometimes they get hurt, but that doesn't mean you never teach a kid to walk.
Ummmmmmm, OK, that's enough analogies for one day. :o)
Excellent analogy. Cognitive imprecision in the time domain is what you're talking about. You've astutely pointed out an interesting pattern. Beyond the time domain - individuals often make bad decisions due to other forms of cognitive imprecision. But the mechanics "wrong or right" tend to lead back to personal responsibility and respect for individual liberty. It's an age old problem that the founding fathers of the United States nearly solved. They did the hard work - Lincoln did a little more - Wilson did a little more - GWB is doing a little more - and so on.
In history diverse societies have demonstrated incredible resilience. Just like a free market has self correcting properties, so too do free societies. No, the sky is not falling. It's being held aloft by philosophical genius.
There was a lengthy timeframe when this would have been true, but I doubt it now. Bush has lost the momentum and the initiative in the WoT, precisely because our tactics have not conveyed decisiveness since Saddam's statue fell. If he tries to go through that window now that it is closed, all he will gain is broken glass and a headache from the 'rat Congress.
We need to continue to strengthen the Iraqis as much as possible, and be in no hurry to go home, but ready or not, it really is up to the Iraqis now.