Posted on 04/11/2002 6:45:41 PM PDT by Pokey78
The leak-proof White House is telling reporters--on background--that the administration is souring on Ariel Sharon. Who are these rogues?
YESTERDAY, in Madrid, the American Secretary of State virtually obliterated the distinction between terrorists and those fighting terrorists: "I think we are all in agreement and the world is in agreement that the solution will not be produced by terror or a response to terror." Quite a departure from the Bush Administration's response to September 11.
Later in the day, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer joined in the holiday from moral judgment. He said that the murderous suicide bomb attack in Haifa, in which eight Israelis were killed and a dozen others wounded, somehow underscored "the need for all parties to step back, for Israel to withdraw, and for the Palestinians and the Arabs to stop the violence, stop the killing." How wonderfully even-handed (even as it ignores the fact that the terrorist attacks against Israel have declined significantly since the Israeli military offensive began).
Administration officials speaking anonymously to reporters went further. "U.S. officials" told CNN White House correspondent John King Tuesday night that the ambush of Israeli military forces in the West Bank "would not have happened had Prime Minister Sharon heeded the president's advice and pulled back his troops." In other words, if Israelis die fighting terrorism, it is their fault for fighting back and for not heeding the American president's warning.
In fact, some senior White House officials seem to have launched a campaign against the national unity government of Ariel Sharon. The Washington Post quoted "administration sources" saying support for Sharon was "eroding . . . inside the White House." These "senior White House aides are beginning to express doubts about whether the Israeli leader can be a long-term partner in achieving the administration's goals in the Middle East."
These "senior White House aides" may be unaware that the current Israeli military operation has the overwhelming support of Israeli people across the political spectrum. But in any case, isn't it rather extraordinary, at a time when Secretary Powell is reaching out his hand to "Chairman" Arafat, that White House officials are now suggesting they would like to see the elected prime minister of Israel out of office?
Which leads to the question: Who are these "senior White House aides"? For months we've been reading about the unprecedented discipline of this White House--how no one speaks to the press without authorization. So we can safely assume that only the highest officials in the White House could be making statements with such significant policy implications. People at the level of, say, Andrew Card, Karl Rove, Karen Hughes, Condoleezza Rice, and Ari Fleischer.
Is it really the case that "regime change" in Israel is now administration policy? If not, these officials may want to publicly dispel the impression left by "senior White House aides."
My guess-this has been purposely floated in order to let Sharon know it is time to back off.
Bush hasn't sold out anyone. Weinberg and Powell are right, in a sense. The suicide bombers are naive, brainwashed young people. The true evil lies in the people who formulate this policy and convince them to do this.
Powell is the Secretary of State. He does what the President tells him to do. The President's FIRST priority is the safety and security of the American people, as he has said numerous times. He is not in charge of Israeli policy, nor is Israel his first priority, and rightly so. Besides making sure that Iraq doesn't attack us, Bush also has about a thousand other things to consider, including the reaction of allies, military strength, dangers from China and others who woul profit from our getting entangled in a Mideast War, and the perfidy of the democrats.
Your desire for a World War II type scenario is not going to happen. You were told this at the beginning...that this was a war unlike any other, that it would take a long time, that many actions would be unseen. Now you are griping because you don't understand everything happening, and you are assigning base motives to the people who are doing the heavy lifting.
One other thing..you as much as called Presidient Bush and his dad antisemitic. That is an absolute lie.
I'll bet he has done this at least 20 times since Bush was sworn in.
I am an American
My capital was attacked.
I want total and complete war against all terrorists
like Bush said in the beginning before he lost his nerve.
No compromise
No weakness
No treason
Total victory and utter defeat
before millions of our citizens and those of our allies perish.
I remember the bodies falling from the WTC. Don't share your Islamic propaganda with me.
I don't want negotiations with terrorists. Period.
Yep, have you ?
Bush hasn't sold out anyone. Weinberg and Powell are right, in a sense. The suicide bombers are naive, brainwashed young people. The true evil lies in the people who formulate this policy and convince them to do this.
You should have been a defense attorney for Nazi concentration camp guards.
Powell is the Secretary of State. He does what the President tells him to do.
Which is why Bush is without excuse.
The President's FIRST priority is the safety and security of the American people, as he has said numerous times.
It should be. I don't believe it is. He has exhibited incredible weakness and put us more at risk these last few weeks.
He is not in charge of Israeli policy, nor is Israel his first priority, and rightly so. Besides making sure that Iraq doesn't attack us, Bush also has about a thousand other things to consider, including the reaction of allies, military strength, dangers from China and others who woul profit from our getting entangled in a Mideast War, and the perfidy of the democrats.
It seems you have forgotten that we have already been attacked and are at war. Sorry if this hurts 401ks and contracts with the House of Saud. We'll get over it.
Your desire for a World War II type scenario is not going to happen.
I know, we don't have the leadership any more.
You were told this at the beginning...that this was a war unlike any other, that it would take a long time, that many actions would be unseen. Now you are griping because you don't understand everything happening, and you are assigning base motives to the people who are doing the heavy lifting.
We were told alot of things about terrorism. Bush lied. He is a hypocrite, albeit an opportunistic hypocrite.
One other thing..you as much as called Presidient Bush and his dad antisemitic. That is an absolute lie.
You are so tranparent and amusing. Make up your own words and then call them a lie. No debate experience under your belt or whatever you wear ?
Bush's father chose the House of Saud over the House of Jacob. His son is walking the same path. I don't want him to, but he doesn't listen to me. He listens to his father when he should listen to his Father.
Your reply is excellent! There seems to be alot of BS flying around on this subject. The fact is that some of these so called conservatives are not really conservatives at all. Some may have voted for Bush as the lesser of two evils but they won't support him or his administration.
They blindly attack Powell, Ashcroft, and Bush as if they were talking about Barney Frank or Bill Clinton with little or no thought as to what they are saying. The tell tale words, "the Constitution", seem to be somewhere in their rants.
It's nice to see some sense typed out in this forum once and a while. Thanks!
Bush, if he keeps this up, will hand the House to, and keep the Senate with, the Democrooks.
Such a legacy that would be, just like Dad and Clinton
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.