The mainstrea media is so locked into its liberal v. conservative stupidity that often real stories are not told, because they do not fit some stereotype of what political debate should be. Fortunately, youtube journalists (the video equiavalent of bloggers) have stepped up. I agree with My Everything that the threat Bush cites is overypped, if not imaginary.
Bush’s incompetence would be hilarious if it wasn’t so dangerous.
The latest terrible decision revolve around the Kurds, the “Other Iraq,” the independence of which is one of the greatest successes of the Iraq War. President Bush and his dangerous, deluded advisors are doing their best to destroy that success too.
- US Secretary of State: Kurds have no authority over oil in their region (courtesy of Democratic Underground)
- Iraqi Kurds Criticize U.S. Detention of Iranian Diplomats
George Bush was the right man in the 2004 election because of his two picks for the Supreme Court, John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Foreign policy wise, it is now clear that John Kerry would have been a better pick. For that matter, nearly anyone would have been a better pick.
An immediate (by the end of February) withdrawal from Iraq would be better than the current policy. An immediate (by the end of February) attack on Iran would be better than the current policy. Bush’s current policy of attacking our friends and appeasing our enemies is one of the the worst policies imaginable. Bush, after winning the Iraq War, is doing all he can to lose it.
Imagine if by 1953, President Truman was faced with the following situation:
An almost completely victorious Republic of Korea succeeded in completely landlocking their evil opponent. Meanwhile, the Republic of China vowed unremittingly hostility against the DPRK holdouts.
Now imagne that the Republic of Korea somehow finds oil all over the place — as does the Republic of China. Further, imagine that there is nothing in the DPRK remnant state.
Further, imagine if, in the closing days of the Korean War, the greatest problem facing the American government was that a ROK/ROC alliance might defeat the DPRK too well — that Koreans and Chinese would be so united in the fight against Communism that Stalinism would never again have a fighting chance in north east asia.
That is an almost perfect analogy to today’s situation in Iraq. Our “catastrophic victory” blinded our power elite to the magnitude of their victory.
There is no reason for us to remain in Iraq for the same reason as US Forces Korea would have had no reason to exist in the above version of 1953.
Leave Iraq now. When we do, al-Ba’ath and al Qa’eda lose in Iraq. Forever.
“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.
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.
Republican Wedge Issues, 2006 Edition,” by Harold Meyerson, American Prospect Online, 08 February 2006, http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11096 (from Real Clear Politics).
Harold’s right. Sometimes, President Bush just grinds my gears.
Old lies die hard. We grow inured to the administration’s howlers in defense of its Iraq policy, so much so that the preposterous case the president made in his State of the Union address for our continued presence in Iraq went almost unnoticed. But he actually said this:
“A sudden withdrawal of our forces from Iraq would abandon our Iraqi allies to death and prison, [and] would put men like bin Laden and Zarqawi in charge of a strategic country. . . .”
Is there one person anywhere inside the administration who really believes that Abu Musab Zarqawi’s murderous band of outsiders would emerge as rulers over the vastly larger and very well-armed Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish legions if we pulled out? The same band of outsiders that tried to stop the Sunnis from voting in December’s parliamentary election and held their turnout down, in some provinces, to a mere 90 percent?
There’s more. This is important.
From a professor:
George Walker Bush, 43rd President of the United States of America, turns 59 today.
Bush will be memorized as the third Post-Cold-War President, the second NAFTA President, and the first Global War on Terrorism President.
Happy birthday, George!
Around the blogosphere: Speed of Thought salutes the Commander-in-Chief, bRight & Early wonders what an appropriate gift would be, Conservative Thinking notes it with other events, Shell bee is not happy, pipblog pipes up from Denmark, and Blogs for Bush enthusiasticly writes, “We here at Blogs For Bush would like to wish President Bush a happy birthday!”
“BIA gets $108M cut in Bush budget,” by Larry Bivins, Sioux Falls Argus Leader, 28 March 2005, http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050328/NEWS/503280306/1001.
I almost jumped for joy at the news
That’s because the House and Senate approved budget blueprints that leave intact President Bush’s proposed cuts in funding for schools and housing for Native American tribes.
Bush’s budget plan would provide $2.2 billion to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, $108.2 million less than what was appropriated for the current fiscal year. The reduction, Johnson said, includes a cut of $90 million – or 33 percent – for school construction.
Great news. The Reservation system is a cruel joke. It is sadism in action. Dirt-poort non-integrating bantustans victimize almost everyone involved. They are a form of cultural obliteration and mass improverishment which may have made sense a century ago, but only cause pain now.
“If we’re ever going to break the cycle of poverty in Indian Country, education is going to be a key part of the strategy,” Johnson said.
The pseudo-entitlement of reservation land and checks, the mass rapes of Indian Country, and rampant alcoholism may be key steps. Throwing money at a broken system is not.
Bush also wants to cut $107 million from the Native American Housing Block Grants Program under the Department of Housing and Urban Development and $46 million from the Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund.
The Argus is known for slopping writing, but it sounds like this is on top of the previous cuts. If so, even better!
Real progress will start when Congress dissolves the tribes. Until then, reducing bantuwelfare is a good start.
Update: SDP thinks the article means “reduction in planned increases” when it says cuts. No one is sure. In the battle between Clarity and Argus Leader staff writing, clarity loses again.
“Minutemen Draw Protest,” by Michelle Malkin, Michelle Malkin, 21 March 2005, http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001815.htm.
Earlier, Madame Malkin implied that the protests against the “Minuteman Project” — an attempt at mass intimidation along the Mexican border — were spearheaded by extremists.
Jim Gilchrist hopes most of his neighbors won’t believe the signs held by protesters at the entrance to his quiet, gated community.
They included “Minuteman, a racist domestic terrorist” and “KKK supports Minuteman” scrawled in bold letters and displayed by almost 50 protesters standing on sidewalks near the Vista de Oro gated community….
Jesse Diaz, a graduate student from UC Riverside, helped organize Saturday’s “call to action.” On Easter, the group plans to demonstrate again in front of a nearby church where they believe he worships.
“He will not go unfettered and challenged,” Diaz s
Fortunately, our pro-North American President George Bush thinks that the “minutemen” are the kooks
The Leadership of North America
Prime Minister Paul Martin, Canada
President George Bush, the United States of America
President Vicente Fox, the Mexican United States
President Bush yesterday said he opposes a civilian project to monitor illegal aliens crossing the border, characterizing them as “vigilantes.”
He said he would pressure Congress to further loosen immigration law.
More than 1,000 people â€” including 30 pilots and their private planes â€” have volunteered for the Minuteman Project, beginning next month along the Arizona-Mexico border. Civilians will monitor the movement of illegal aliens for the month of April and report them to the Border Patrol.
Mr. Bush said after yesterday’s continental summit, with Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin at Baylor University, that he finds such actions unacceptable.
“I’m against vigilantes in the United States of America,” Mr. Bush said at a joint press conference. “I’m for enforcing the law in a rational way.”
Sadly, Senate Opposition Leader Harry Reid isn’t so courageous
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, of Nevada, says Democrats have been willing to work with Mr. Bush, but that first the president must persuade congressmen of his own party to embrace his plan
So Reid will fight for what’s right — after the fight has already been won.
“China Asks N. Korea to Admit Uranium Program,” by Jung Gwon-hyeon, Digital Chosunilbo, http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200501/200501240020.html, 24 January 2005.
“Opposition Pushes for NK Rights Act,” by Reuben Staines, The Korea Times, http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200501/kt2005012517072410220.htm, 25 January 2005.
Good news from Korea, via One Free Korea.
The Chinese are stepping up pressure on Pyongyang to tell the truth
The paper, quoting multiple officials connected with the six-party talks about North Koreaâ€™s nuclear issue, said the change in the Chinese position was the result of the U.S. presenting Beijing with persuasive evidence of the uranium program. China is asking the U.S. for energy assistance to North Korea conditional on Pyongyang admitting to and abandoning its nuclear programs.
With the second Bush administration signaling that it wants to tackle the nuclear issue through dialogue, Beijing has been keen to restart the six-party talks, the Nihon Keizai reported. China mediated the U.S.-North Korea contacts in New York last November and December.
While in South Korea, the Grand National Party (South Korea’s center-right party) is getting on the human rights bandwagon
The opposition Grand National Party (GNP) is pushing ahead with a South Korean version of the controversial North Korean Human Rights Act enacted by the United States late last year.
The bill, which calls for Seoul to take a leading role in assisting North Korean defectors, was put forward by Rep. Hwang Woo-yea and is cosponsored by all 120 lawmakers from the conservative GNP, party officials said Tuesday.
Hwang said the party will seek to pass the legislation by the end of the year, but it will need first to win the backing of at least 30 other lawmakers in the 299-seat National Assembly.
A GNP policy analyst said the legislation is designed to complement the U.S. human rights act, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush in October.
“The bill starts from a premise that our country has the most interest in North Korean issues,” a GNP policy advisor said. “Some elements overlap with certain provisions of the U.S. law, but our country should have enacted the law first,” the policy expert said.
The legislation would make it easier for North Koreans who have fled their homeland to seek asylum and safe passage to South Korea, other GNP officials said
If enacted, it would allow defectors to apply for refugee status by contacting officials at any South Korean diplomatic missions worldwide, they said.
Under the bill, the South Korean government would issue passports to defectors upon request, the party officials said, arguing that this is in line with the Constitution which recognizes North Koreans as citizens of the South.
Japanese lawmakers are also reportedly moving to introduce legislation targeting Pyongyang’s human rights. Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party has begun drafting a bill in the same mold as the U.S. act that would ban aid to the North until it improves its human rights record, including the dispute over Japanese kidnapped by North Korean agents during the Cold War.
What’s the thread in these two stories, besides the good news? That both rely on U.S. diploamcy. In the debates Senator Kerry advocated unilateral talks with the North. Fortunately, President Bush’s wise multilateralism is laying the groundwork for an Asian NATO.
President Bush is a master at great-power diplomacy. I doubt that our country has ever had relations as good with India, China, Japan, and Russia as we do now. This, at least as much as Bush’s “unilateralism” in the Iraq War, is the cause of Old Europe’s hostility.
Bush works with great powers — the world capitals that shape the future. Any future worth creating begins in Moscow, Beijing, Tokyo, New Delhi, and Washington. Cities like Paris and Berlin, while having something to contribute, are not world powers (if even regional powers for long). Paris and Berlin are in the same category as Warsaw, not Washington