Question of the Moment
By David Peterson at Dec 07, 2006 |
|
Meet Prime Minister Grave and President Deteriorating. Have you ever seen two more diminished figures than these? In the annals of slam-dunk wars of aggression and the holding of news conferences to justify them at a later stage, theirs are the shrunken heads of historical regimes.
Wednesday (December 6) witnessed the release of the much-heralded Iraq Study Group Report. Fortunately for us here at ZNet, the "unanimous view" of this 80-some-page document can be summed up in fewer than 50 words. Namely (and correcting for the document's governing rhetoric):The Americans may have gone into Iraq to enhance their wealth and power. But now, some 45 months on, it turns out that they are poorer and weaker than they were before. Already great, the risk of dramatic decline threatens to become catastrophic. Shit!
I suppose, then, that the Question of the Moment is (or at least it ought to be): How should we receive The Iraq Study Group Report?
Simultaneously as an "anticlimax" and the "absolute refutation of the cult of U.S. unilateralism that has driven foreign policy under Mr. Bush," the latter now passing for "conventional wisdom" around Washington, thanks to a "radical shift in thinking about Iraq" and the dramatic successes of the anti-occupation resistance? ("Talking sense on Iraq," Toronto Globe and Mail.)
As a "last-ditch strategy to stabilize Iraq," one that "has already been embraced in large measure by the Iraqi government and U.S. military commanders, if not explicitly by President Bush"? ("The Study Group Reports," Washington Post.)
How about as a "carefully crafted compromise designed to ensure consensus among its own membership rather than a precise plan for the Pentagon," the report's "real importance" lying in the "political opportunity that it offers to the White House and Pentagon, not its detailed proposals"? ("Quick Study," The Times.)Perhaps as an "implicit repudiation of the entire divisive international and domestic political project that President George Bush has pursued since 9/11, with the unfailing and dismaying public support of Tony Blair"? ("If not now, when?" The Guardian.)
Even as a "stunning indictment of Mr. Bush's failure--in Iraq and no less in Washington," and an effort to "to avert the worst scenario, in which a stubborn George W. Bush spends the next two years blindly insisting he will accept nothing short of victory, while Iraq keeps spiraling out of control and the Iraqis get no closer to being able to contain the chaos after the Americans leave"? ("Welcome Political Cover," New York Times.)
Or as the proverbial lead balloon--pre-emptively deflated by events in the real world, at most seconding in words what already has been determined on the ground?
Iraq Study Group (Homepage), United States Institute of Peace
The Iraq Study Group Report, James A. Baker III and Lee H. Hamilton, December 6, 2006 (For the PDF version of the complete report.)
"Testimony on the Report of the Iraq Study Group," U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, December 7, 2006
"Joint Statement by the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Iraq," White House Office of the Press Secretary, November 30, 2006
"Background Press Briefing by a Senior Administration Official on the President's Meetings with Prime Minister Maliki," White House Office of the Press Secretary, November 30, 2006
"President Bush Receives Report from the Iraq Study Group," White House Office of the Press Secretary, December 6, 2006
"President Bush Meets with British Prime Minister Tony Blair," White House Office of the Press Secretary, December 7, 2006
National Strategy for Victory in Iraq, White House Office of the Press Secretary, November 30, 2005. (For the PDF version of the complete report.)
"Renewal in Iraq" (Homepage), White House Office of the Press Secretary"'Intelligence' and the Invasion of Iraq," ZNet, April 1, 2005
"Question of the Moment," ZNet, December 7, 2006



War on Terrorism
By Kissenger, Clark at Dec 15, 2006 14:53 PM
The goal of the War in Iraq is presently reflected in the price of OIL - $62.23. Today OPEC announced it will cut production to sustain the price established by The New World Order that is in control of the Global Supply of Oil.
911 leading to "The Global War on Terrorism" leading to the illegal War in Iraq was all started for the benefit of Saudi Arabia and the Royal Family, creating terrorist to destabilize the world's supply of Oil, and driving up the price. We should have invaded Saudi Arabia, then one could argue it was done to "enhance the wealth and power" of all Americans. Instead, The Royal Family, put in place by the British, is left in control of 40% of the World's endowment of Oil, the true weapon of mass destruction.
All US citizens represented by Politicians are collectively responsible with the Auto Industry, GM - Ford- Chrysler and Big Oil, Mobil - Exxon - Chevron for not dealing with the reality of our shrinking Oil reserves and Increasing Pollution caused by huge gas guzzling cars and Suvs. OPEC fired one over our bow in the 70's. American arrogance and leadership failed to respond.
What OPEC learned and continues to learn is that the demand for Oil and energy are growing increasingly more inelastic as the world turns to capitalism. From a Global Economics perspective they are in a good place. The price will be set to maximize the Profit to the Royal Family. $100 - $200 a barrel Oil is in our future.
Mission Accomplished - Bush betrayed all of us. The real cost of the pervasive political corruption witnessed and condoned by my fellow Americans over the last 35 years is in the ten of trillions of $$$$$$$.
America is technically bankrupt, by 2020 it will know what that means, as our government prints cash to pay its bills.
Reply this comment
ARROGANCE....strong feeling of self-importance expressed by
By Russell, Mariam at Dec 08, 2006 11:03 AM
treating other people with contempt or disregard.
We are dealing with a family who think they are destined to rule, born to rule, so whatever they do is correct or at least excusable as a temporary mis-step. These people are not open to reason. Baker was not sent to reason. He was sent to manipulate....the American Public into thinking that an answer to the PROBLEM OF IRAQ has been formulated, and Bush 2 and Co. into doing just enough to quiet the American Public so that the Bushes do not lose out entirely.
But, read their lips, the presence in and control of Iraq is not negotiable!!!!!!!
It is like dealing with the seriously insane. First you have to realize that they do not think like you or me.
DO YOU THINK IF WE STARTED A MAYFLOWER FUND AND COLLECTED ENOUGH, THEY MIGHT BE PERSUADED TO MOVE TO THE FARM IN PARAGUAY? DADDY, MAMA, BROTHERS, SISTERS, COUSINS TO THE 21ST UNCLES, AUNTS, GRANDMAS, GRANDADDIES, DOGS, CATS, CANARIES. AND MAYBE BEST FRIENDS LIKE CHENEY, RUMMY, MISS TEETH, AND ALL THE OTHER CAST OF STRANGELOVE-LIKE CHARACTERS.
Reply this comment
Who really holds the cards?
By Kissenger, Clark at Dec 08, 2006 09:59 AM
Reply this comment
Taibbi Column on Baker Panel
By Ajit, Ajit at Dec 08, 2006 02:51 AM
Here is one of the best and sarcastic piece on Baker Panel by Matt Taibbi on Rolling Stone.
http://tinyurl.com/ymsrcu,
Reply this comment
Best Summary
By Ajit, Ajit at Dec 08, 2006 02:08 AM
The third paragraph is the best summary of Baker Hamilton Report I have read. There is this silly talk of inviting Iran and Syria to a regional conference. It seems the arrogance of washington hoodlums knows no bounds. I mean they think they can threaten attack on syria and Iran whenever they want and invite them to talks whenever it suits them. Iranians are not fools. They have no interest in helping Bush Gang to extricate themselves. And more importantly they have no effective control on Iraqi Shias leave alone Sunni Insurgency. Sadr is actually anti Iranian.
I am not sure of Syria. Sy Hersh said recently that Bashar is writing letters to Bush promising help and calling for working together. But Bush (Read Cheney) is arrogantly dismissing Bashar's conciliatory moves. Bush Hoodlums are intent on shooting their foot into their mouth.
Reply this comment