Bush: A Terrorist-Appeaser Mugged by Reality?

U.S. Considering Ending Outreach to Insurgents,” by Robin Wright, Washington Post, 1 December 2006, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/30/AR2006113001710.html (from Daily Kos).

The 80% Solution,” by BarbinMD, Daily Kos, 1 December 2006, http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/12/1/73529/5740.

Great, great news.

Is This Man Coming Back?

Please let it be true.

The Bush administration is deliberating whether to abandon U.S. reconciliation efforts with Sunni insurgents and instead give priority to Shiites and Kurds, who won elections and now dominate the government, according to U.S. officials.

The proposal, put forward by the State Department as part of a crash White House review of Iraq policy, follows an assessment that the ambitious U.S. outreach to Sunni dissidents has failed. U.S. officials are increasingly concerned that their reconciliation efforts may even have backfired, alienating the Shiite majority and leaving the United States vulnerable to having no allies in Iraq, according to sources familiar with the State Department proposal.

Some insiders call the proposal the “80 percent” solution, a term that makes other parties to the White House policy review cringe. Sunni Arabs make up about 20 percent of Iraq’s 26 million people.

If this is true, thank God. For three years Bush has led us into the wilderness, appeasing terrorists, subverting a democratically elected government, and exposing his administration for the out-of-date, intellectually bankrupt organization that it really is.

The sooner Bush accepts the reality that the United States Military gave him on a silver platter three years ago, the better for us, for the Iraqis, and the world.

Bush’s greatest accomplishment, if he actually begins fighting terrorists and supporting democracy in Iraq (instead of vice versa), is smashing our enemies, to forever weaken the Arab National-Secularists and the Qaeda Jihadis. Iraq is Vietnam for al Qaeda and al Baath.

One thought on “Bush: A Terrorist-Appeaser Mugged by Reality?”

  1. Hi. Including Shiites in the “priority” mentioned will NOT work. We need to be equally heavy-handed to both of these clueless factions. We have given “priority” to Shiites before and it DIDN'T work. We don't need more of the same crap. What needs to happen is we need to get rid of Al-Sadr. We passed the opportunity to kill him in 2003 because we thought it would it would cause chaos. Well chaos ensued anyway, it was inevitable, and we should have taken him out in the fray. Giving the Shiites political leaders obviously didn't take away his importance. If we are serious about securing the country, Sadr needs to go, and Baghdad needs to be cleared of the militias, Al Anbar style.

  2. Michael,

    Thank you for your comment. And thank you for your service.

    To me, it is a question of what the war is for and what Iraq should be. I believe that the war is for destroying our enemies — the Baathists and the Qaedists — and that Iraq should be what the people of Iraq want. This leads a clear strategy: empowering local politicians who want to fight our enemies. All we need to do is supply money, materiel, and air power to anti-Qaeda anti-Baath elements, such as Hakim's Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the Dawa, the Kurdish Democratic Party, and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan — and let the locals do the rest.

    Bush's plan, however, is more etheriel. He wants to create some Western society there, but is very hesitant to use force against his enemies. In Japan and Germany we outlied religious sects we disliked, but Bush's liberalism would not allow that. Rather, Bush is repeating the South Vietnam/Persia playbook of betraying our friends and refusing to confront our enemies.

    I am astonished and sickened by Bush's weakness from mid 2003 until now. I did not think that Bush was another Jimmy Carter in 2003. I wish he had not turned into one.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *