Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Here's hoping that it works. By works, of course, I mean that it gives right-wing pundits something with which they can bludgeon the Democrats. Seriously, I do hope the Iraqis can make this work. I know that the right-wing will act as though they knew this was about to happen, and was the reason that they had been urging patience. Blah, Blah, blah. I wonder if they'll use this news to attack Warner, too. And just maybe, the Iraqis can give us hope that the dysfunctional politics in this country can be made effective, too.
Dem and MSM spin on this should reach new heights of creativity, to the extent it is even mentioned.
Informal talks beat formal negotiations?
It's easier to get something done when people aren't looking at you expecting you to do it.
The funny thing about war is that it is full of surprises.The moment it looks bad, it isn't. The moment Anbar is "lost," its won. This is why it is always better to support victory than defeat.It sucks to be a Dem these days - cheering on the bad news, and being disgruntled at the good news. Thank god for nuance!
So they say they're going on vacation -- which looks awful to us -- and then... they reach the political agreement....I sure hope it becomes the law of the Iraqi land.Reading the comments, it seems that, to some, this agreement is more about hurting the democrats than it is about winning and bringing peace to Iraq.
It's the same kind of "vacation" our congresscritters have been on. All sorts of grassroots townhall meetings that allow us, the voters, to tell them what we think of their screwups. Mixed with a heck of a lot of campaigning even if they're not up for election for years. (Lots of ducking and weaving going on, too).It just suited the media and the Dems to portray the word "vacation" to mean an outing at the beach or some such nonsense.
I frankly have no desire to "understand" the Iraqi (government) at all. I'm having a tough enough time understanding our own.
"...and was the reason that they had been urging patience. Blah, Blah, blah."Peter,Yes, that's exactly what we know a Democrat would think, when the truth is completely different. There is no scenario in which American security, power, influence or moral standing is improved by acquiescing to the Democrats' preferred strategy of cut, run, surrender and religious cleansing in Iraq. The Democrat lust for American defeat in Iraq, so fully articulated by countless Democrats across the nation, if achieved would significantly weaken American security, power, influence and moral standing as we'd abandon Iraqis to the same fate of those victimized by an earlier Democrat surrender in Southeast Asia.Although I appreciate your serious hope that "the Iraqis can make this work, your assessment that the "right-wing" was urging patience because they knew this was about to happen is completely off-base. The reasons for urging patience come down to two points: there is no virtue in surrendering to an enemy that has not defeated us on the battlefield; attriting the enemy is a necessary condition to securing political accommodation in Iraq. The Democrat fantasy that "US occupiers" are the primary problem in Iraq is, and continues to be, completely wrong. If you want peace, security and political stability in Iraq, and American security, power, influence or moral standing improved, then you rightfully want American troops to remain to secure that objective. Unless, of course, you're satisfied by those conditions being imposed by al Qaeda or Iran...or not at all.
It would be nice if my nephew would be home for Christmas. The end date varies from October through March, depending on when you ask. The first time over was much shorter.
I dont believe Americans, in particular, understand the arabic "ein'shalla." It has a very stong cultural meaning over and above "as Allah wills." Time tables are not particularly useful in the Arabic world, when their notion of future events is bounded. Hope it works.
According to this link, "a policy committee hammering out a draft new oil law for Iraq now has only one issue left to resolve and the legislation should be enacted by the end of the year, Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih said." Good news indeed.
Too many jims said... According to this link, "a policy committee hammering out a draft new oil law for Iraq now has only one issue left to resolve and the legislation should be enacted by the end of the year? The linked to article was published in November 3, 2006 right before our congressional elections and referred to the end of the year as the target date for the enactment of the new oil law. Does the end of the year refered to in the article mean 2006 or 2007? Was the article published in coordination with our election cycle?
Tim, my thoughts about Iraq are more nuanced and complex than you seem to suggest. I don't think I've advocated cut and run or anything that looked like that. Instead, I've argued that the surge is what should have happened a few years ago, when this administration was telling the American public that the insurgency was in its last throes. Leading congressional Democrats and the administration have very little credibility as far as I'm concerned. In the past few months, pro-war and pro-administration pundits have not been saying that a political settlement was in the offing, and I won't stand to hear them start claiming that they knew this settlement was about to happen. This is, as Sloan put it, one of the surprises that happens during war. I sincerely hope that this settlement bears fruit.
It's easier to get something done when people aren't looking at you expecting you to do it.This is why I make a terrible nude model.
"Tim, my thoughts about Iraq are more nuanced and complex than you seem to suggest."Peter,Good. And now you know what the broad brush feels like when it paints in the other direction.
Tim, there's a reason I don't participate in any left-leaning discussion boards.
And just maybe, the Iraqis can give us hope that the dysfunctional politics in this country can be made effective, too.LOL, Peter. It might just be easier for those five Iraqis, with their centuries of theological estrangement and blood feud, to come to some kind of agreement and reconciliation than for our leaders.
peter hoh said..."Tim, there's a reason I don't participate in any left-leaning discussion boards.Lack of intellect?
I'm not sure I understand the surprise. Isn't this what most congressmen do during their "Vacation"?Folks may have felt the need to mock the Iraqi legislators for doing it -- perhaps because it was so fun to mock President Bush whenever he moved his base of operations to the Ranch -- but they certainly shouldn't have been fooled by their own rhetoric.It's my understanding that much of the real political power in Iraq still lies with tribal sheiks rather than with the legislators who represent their regions. This "vacation" gave Maliki the time to go around and speak to the people who really needed to be persuaded.If there were news agencies trying to report what's actually happening in Iraq, those visits might have been considered newsworthy, rather than mocked as "vacation"...
LOS, thanks for proving my point.
Post a Comment