Posted on 12/07/2006 10:39:46 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
~snip~
Back in 1990, Baker convinced Syria to join the Gulf War coalition against Saddam Hussein. Now, he wants this George Bush to talk to Syria ... and Iran, too.
"It has to be hard-nosed, it has to be determined," Baker said in a television interview in October. "You don't give away anything, but in my view, it's not appeasement to talk to your enemies."
But this president may not be in much of a hurry to accept Baker's ideas about that — or much else. Asked if Baker would help implement the report, a spokesman for Mr. Bush said, "Jim Baker can go back to his day job."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
Ha! - I'm stealin' that one...
The thing that really gets me is that we havent heard what Oprah thinks is the right thing to do in Iraq...until we hear that I think Bush should not make any decisions about the war
Actually Tim Russert heads up the show.
Glad you enjoyed it.
"LOL..I have noticed the two times that Pres. Bush has spoken about this ISG report, he is thankful but dismissive, IMHO"
____________________________
Yes, and I noticed he kept calling it "interesting". That does sound tactful but dismissive.
I just emailed it to James Baker at...
isg.surrendermonkeys@bakerbotts.com
You little scamp, you!
Oops you're right, I always get those DNC spokesmen on the alphabet channels confused, they all say the same things so it's just one fat talking head in my mind.
And then he has the audacity, again, to demand every line item be implemented.
Wow! What a great front page. Love it!
".....on the House of Saud payroll."
Exactly; before and DURING his term on the ISG. And with the LameStreamMedia hyping the Dims election results in November as part of an "ethics in government" concern of the voters, where is their reporting on the special interst conflict that Jim Baker had, just for even taking ANY role on the Iraq Surrender Group? Oh, sorry, I forgot, the subjects of investigative reports are only supposed to be people who do not parrot the LameStreamMedia's point of view.
Yes, Jim Baker thanked the dictator in Syria for simply not objecting to our kicking Saddam out of Kuwait - not that we needed any permission or help from Syria to do it - by negotiating an international agreement that made Lebanon a vassal of Syria. Yet, the LameStreamMedia would lead you to believe that the people of Lebabon have forgotton the "cynical American self-interest" that created their present problems, and Mr. Baker's role in that betrayal.
The LameStreamMedia loved how there was not this big giant love-fest from the Shia in southern Iraq when we went back to Iraq in 2003, and how there is still a distrust of the US among many Shia. Yet, they will dare not mention that that distrust comes from the Baker engineered betrayal they felt when they rose up against Saddam and we did not finish him off in 1991, when their men, by the tens of thousands, were begging to "surrender" to us and join us.
As much as the "Arab street" (the Arab government controlled media) might applaud the ISG, I doubt if there is any love for it anywhere in Iraq except among the Baathists, Al Queda and the other insurgents. To the Iraqis it must look like a 1991 redux.
Great post, Wuli. James Baker and x41 are responsible for far more of our current mess than most Americans realize.
They were doing what came natural to their generation - holding onto perceptions that had been guiding us since the cold war.
Unfortunately, many of those perceptions, particularly in the Middle East had always been, or had become, based on fictions before the cold war was officially over.
Alliances and allies have never been things of principle to the duplicitous Arabs, particularly the Saudis, and in many cases we had always been more of an ally to them than most had ever been for us - in word and in deed. Also, the WWII and cold war perceptions had masked the full and across-the-board implications of the Islamic fascism, and its growth which began at the end of WWII and was already extensive long before the first Gulf war and the public emergence of Al Queda. There are many aspects of that Islamic fascism that, from its inception, have been fostered and supported by some of our so-called "allies" in the region, with all its anti-western and western-hating aspects.
To put it simply, at the heart of the matter, there is not a dime's worth of difference, from a western perspective, between the political and religious views of Osama bin Laden and the ruling government and ruling Wahabi religious leaders of Saudi Arabia. They mouth the same western-hatred views as Osama in their state-controlled media and in their schools. Their schools, across the Middle East, produce the mush-for-brains cannon fodder of young men willing to go "defeat" the evil west. Wealthy Saudis connected to the Royal family continue to be the largest financial contributors to Al Queda. The Saudi royals do not even actually oppose the terrorism of Al Queda. They only oppose the use of it against them. These are Baker's friends.
Bottom line is until the waring groups in Iraq et al fight it out to an end.... there will be no solution. He can talk about a political solution all he wants, but it isn't a reality.
You've got McCain's number - The preening he and the other RINO and rest of the Gang of 14 did on camera showed him for the narcissist he is. BIG ego, and he cares little about damaging the Repubs. So far I see only one who has done something for our nation, and that is Duncan Hunter - "Secure the Border". But the pro-illegals of the party will sabotage him.
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.