"Everything that is going on between Sunni and Shiites, the
troublemaker in the middle is America."
"The Iraqis we hear about are first indignant, and then infuriated,
that Americans aren't on the scene to protect them and to punish the
aggressors. And so they join the clothing merchant who says that
everything is the fault of the Americans."
"Mr. Bush has a very difficult internal problem here because to make
the kind of concession that is strategically appropriate requires a
mitigation of policies he has several times affirmed in high-flown
pronouncements. His challenge is to persuade himself that he can
submit to a historical reality without forswearing basic commitments
in foreign policy.
He will certainly face the current development as military leaders are
expected to do: They are called upon to acknowledge a tactical
setback, but to insist on the survival of strategic policies.
Yes, but within their own counsels, different plans have to be made.
And the kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat."


Another, blunter than Kristol, neocon discoursing on the fate of the
CICBush43 adventure in Iraq.  It is an easy thing, using the best
armed forces in the world to vanquish a nation.  It is quite another,
after victory, to occupy, pacify and take over the governing
infrastructure (instead of merely dissolving it as Bremer did), and
then modify the vitrolic, opposing and vengeful mindsets of that
nation's population to form a single national mindset.  CICBush43 and
his gang have utterly failed in their post-victory efforts.  
Another bad day in Bushland.

David Bier

http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200602241451.asp

February 24, 2006, 2:51 p.m.
It Didn't Work

"I can tell you the main reason behind all our woes — it is America."
The New York Times reporter is quoting the complaint of a clothing
merchant in a Sunni stronghold in Iraq. "Everything that is going on
between Sunni and Shiites, the troublemaker in the middle is America."

One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed. The
same edition of the paper quotes a fellow of the American Enterprise
Institute. Mr. Reuel Marc Gerecht backed the American intervention. He
now speaks of the bombing of the especially sacred Shiite mosque in
Samara and what that has precipitated in the way of revenge. He
concludes that "The bombing has completely demolished" what was being
attempted — to bring Sunnis into the defense and interior ministries.

Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved
uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great
human reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough.
No doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to
contend against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs
and grenades and pistols.

The Iraqis we hear about are first indignant, and then infuriated,
that Americans aren't on the scene to protect them and to punish the
aggressors. And so they join the clothing merchant who says that
everything is the fault of the Americans.

The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, elucidates on the
complaint against Americans. It is not only that the invaders are
American, it is that they are "Zionists." It would not be surprising
to learn from an anonymously cited American soldier that he can
understand why Saddam Hussein was needed to keep the Sunnis and the
Shiites from each others' throats.

A problem for American policymakers — for President Bush, ultimately —
is to cope with the postulates and decide how to proceed.

One of these postulates, from the beginning, was that the Iraqi
people, whatever their tribal differences, would suspend internal
divisions in order to get on with life in a political structure that
guaranteed them religious freedom.

The accompanying postulate was that the invading American army would
succeed in training Iraqi soldiers and policymkers to cope with
insurgents bent on violence.

This last did not happen. And the administration has, now, to cope
with failure. It can defend itself historically, standing by the
inherent reasonableness of the postulates. After all, they govern our
policies in Latin America, in Africa, and in much of Asia. The failure
in Iraq does not force us to generalize that violence and
antidemocratic movements always prevail. It does call on us to adjust
to the question, What do we do when we see that the postulates do not
prevail — in the absence of interventionist measures (we used these
against Hirohito and Hitler) which we simply are not prepared to take?
It is healthier for the disillusioned American to concede that in one
theater in the Mideast, the postulates didn't work. The alternative
would be to abandon the postulates. To do that would be to register a
kind of philosophical despair. The killer insurgents are not entitled
to blow up the shrine of American idealism.

Mr. Bush has a very difficult internal problem here because to make
the kind of concession that is strategically appropriate requires a
mitigation of policies he has several times affirmed in high-flown
pronouncements. His challenge is to persuade himself that he can
submit to a historical reality without forswearing basic commitments
in foreign policy.

He will certainly face the current development as military leaders are
expected to do: They are called upon to acknowledge a tactical
setback, but to insist on the survival of strategic policies.

Yes, but within their own counsels, different plans have to be made.
And the kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat. 





--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to