Article

2006-12-07 Home Front: Politix

Giuliani Calls Idea of Quitting Iraq Terrible Mistake'

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by DanNY 2006-12-07 06:29|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 "Israel and Palestine is an important issue. Sometimes it's used as an excuse to deal with underlying issues. But the reality here is that the Islamo-fundamentalist terrorists are at war with our way of life, with our modern world, with rights for women, religious freedom, societies that have religious freedom. And all of that would still exist, no matter what happens in Israel and Palestine."

Thank you, sir, for getting the team back on topic.

Posted by Jules 2006-12-07 09:29|| 2006-12-07 09:29|| Front Page Top

#2 Already the combat role is reducing while the advisory role advances. Someone is doing something. Quitting is worst than nothing.

Posted by Sneaze Shaiting3550 2006-12-07 09:29|| 2006-12-07 09:29|| Front Page Top

#3 The editorial from the same issue:

Giuliani v. Baker
New York Sun Editorial
December 7, 2006

Now that the Secretary of State Baker has made public his recommendations in respect of Iraq it's becoming clear why Mayor Giuliani quietly dropped off the commission not long after it got up and running. Our Eli Lake has particulars on page one. The nub of the advice from Mr. Baker and Lee Hamilton, a former congressman from Indiana, and their colleagues is that America should cut and run. The "cut" part is that the commission wants America to cut a deal with Iraq's neighbors nearly every one of which is an enemy of America and the idea of a free Iraq and the "run" part is to pull our GIs out of the fight by the start of the election season in 2008.

The persons who speak on background for Mr. Giuliani, ever the graceful diplomat, stress that the former mayor really did sense that the commission was going to take too much of his time. In addition, he had concluded the commission was a place for retired politicians, not for those who could be running for president next year. Mr. Giuliani himself praised the report yesterday at a public appearance. But the way to translate Mr. Giuliani's action is that anyone who ran for president on a platform of retreat in the middle of a major world war couldn't get elected dog catcher.

Not that Mr. Giuliani was looking out for merely his own interests. He deserves great credit. The Baker commission has gone the wrong way on important matters of principle, something no doubt Mr. Giuliani spotted not long after he got horn-swoggled into joining the group. Not only does the commission recommend negotiations with the various Middle East tyrannies, but it wants to use as coin in these negotiations the security and even sovereignty of the state of Israel. Outsiders first got a glimpse of this last week in a story by our Mr. Lake, quoting an e-mail sent by one of the expert advisers to Mr. Baker's group.

The expert, Raymond Close, a former CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia, said he expected "any realistic chance of success" would depend on "a major initiative, promoted and vigorously supported by the United States, to reach a comprehensive resolution to the Israel-Arab crisis through a process of reasonable compromise and accommodation between Israel and its Arab neighbors." Wrote Mr. Close, according to Mr. Lake's report, "perhaps the US will have to put pressure on Israel to make territorial concessions in the Golan."

Mr. Lake's report, not to mention Mr. Close's expectation, proved all-too-accurate. Recommendation 16 of the Baker commission: "the Israelis should return the Golan Heights." How rewarding terrorism in Iraq with concessions of strategic land to the undemocratic, terrorist-hosting Baathist regime at Damascus is in America's national interest is beyond us. The report goes so far as to claim that Iraqi opposition to America "spiked in the aftermath of Israel's bombing campaign in Lebanon." Talk about a blame- Israel-first mentality.

Even for those who, unlike this newspaper, do not rank security of Israel as one, albeit only one, of the original war aims, the Baker commission report represents a triumph of Brent Scowcroft-ism of the kind that helped cost George H.W. Bush a second term in the White House. It would have us drop the ambition of regime change in the country, Iran, with one of the cruelest and most hostile regimes. And then to top it off Messrs. Baker and Hamilton want to to set milestones for Iraq's legislature.

Or, to put it another way, barely a year after the Iraqis gave the world an inspiring example of courage, with millions going to the polls in the face of enemy threats, Messrs. Baker and Hamilton want to tell the legislature the Iraqis elected what to do. Finally, Messrs. Baker and Hamilton want the formation of a broad-ranging "contact group" of Iraq's neighbors. We predict that will lead to peace talks with an enemy who doesn't want peace and just before the 2008 election a next-generation Henry Kissinger will come out before the cameras and declare "peace is at hand." Don't forget what happened next.

By our lights, though, the worst damage of the Baker commission's recommendations, if they are adopted, won't be to Israel or to the political hopes of American Republicans but to the cause of freedom and democracy around the world and the American national security on which it rests. The commission's message to our enemies and to our potential allies is that if enough Americans are killed, America's foreign policy elite will give up on its core values of freedom and democracy and return to the pre-September 11 mode of coddling Middle East dictators, putting oil and a façade of "stability" ahead of America's long-term security.

The list of those with whom the Baker commission consulted includes dozens of foreign ambassadors, former generals, and newspaper columnists, but not a single widow of a New York City firefighter. Mayor Giuliani spoke at the funerals of so many firefighters that it is understandable that he would not want to follow the Baker commission's recommendation to return to the approach that America pursued before September 11. And as he sets out in quest of the White House, he can be proud of the fact that he stepped down from the Baker commission before its report was written.

Posted by tu3031 2006-12-07 09:37|| 2006-12-07 09:37|| Front Page Top

#4 Tranzi Baker is going to be pissed. Way to go Mayor Giuliani!!! You've got my vote!

Posted by ex-lib 2006-12-07 14:08|| 2006-12-07 14:08|| Front Page Top

#5 " . . . the Baker commission report represents a triumph . . . that helped cost George H.W. Bush a second term in the White House"

" It would have us drop the ambition of regime change in the country, Iran, with one of the cruelest and most hostile regimes."

"And then to top it off Messrs. Baker and Hamilton want to to set milestones for Iraq's legislature . . . Or, to put it another way, barely a year after the Iraqis gave the world an inspiring example of courage, with millions going to the polls in the face of enemy threats, Messrs. Baker and Hamilton want to tell the legislature the Iraqis elected what to do."

Finally, Messrs. Baker and Hamilton want the formation of a broad-ranging "contact group" of Iraq's neighbors. We predict that will lead to peace talks with an enemy who doesn't want peace and just before the 2008 election a next-generation Henry Kissinger will come out before the cameras and declare "peace is at hand."

By our lights, though, the worst damage of the Baker commission's recommendations, if they are adopted, won't be to Israel or to the political hopes of American Republicans but to the cause of freedom and democracy around the world and the American national security on which it rests.

The commission's message to our enemies and to our potential allies is that if enough Americans are killed, America's foreign policy elite will give up on its core values of freedom and democracy and return to the pre-September 11 mode of:

1.) coddling Middle East dictators

2.) putting oil and a façade of "stability" ahead of America's long-term security."

And this is why the transnational "politicians" are so very, very dangerous. Their loyalties are to their business interests only. While we're all focused on the turban terrorists, the white-collar terrorists are having their way.

I feel sick.

Good for Giuliani for going his own way, but I doubt it will turn out in our favor. You've got Baker, a false report, the Dems and the Moslem leaders ganging up, all with the blessing and support of the press. It won't be long before nobody knows what's going on, and the only way out will seem to be to do what Baker is designing. He's way ahead of the game, and is playing everyone.

Posted by ex-lib 2006-12-07 14:16|| 2006-12-07 14:16|| Front Page Top

#6 Folks it's just the next step on the road to having a few US cities nuked or otherwise rendered uninhabitable.

Check the box and look ahead to identify the next one.

The Plan proceeds apace.

Posted by .com 2006-12-07 14:21|| 2006-12-07 14:21|| Front Page Top

#7 I think, rather, it will be simply a slow surrender, .com. Nuking American cities would get us too riled up and we just might want to fight back.

Posted by ex-lib 2006-12-07 14:26|| 2006-12-07 14:26|| Front Page Top

#8 ex-lib - There's more than one enemy - mebbe I shouldn't have said The Plan - it makes it sound like they're logical or something, lol. The alliance of convenience arrayed against Freedom doesn't include an ~~American~~ Great Satan Study Group, lol. Some are friskier than others. The "Immoderate" Muzzies can't help themselves, they're just bloody MoFo's. Osama hissownself said they need to do some serious killin', not just enslave us. Kimmie's got Little Man Syndrome... Hell, they all do, lol. Yeah - I think someone or other will get hinky and screw it up for the others.

Posted by .com 2006-12-07 14:35|| 2006-12-07 14:35|| Front Page Top

#9 Just heard about that guy from CNet who died... There are Grief Counselors on-site now at CNet so his co-workers can, uh, um, get better I guess.

Musing on this a minute, I now think it will be a race: will we surrender before they commit the next atrocity?

First past the post.

Posted by .com 2006-12-07 14:40|| 2006-12-07 14:40|| Front Page Top

#10 Yeah, I was thinking that, .com. Just cuz' some of the muzzies want to play the "cooperate and influence" game, doesn't mean some nut job of greater intensity wouldn't use the chance to do something big. Barring that, I still think it will be slow bleed. Of course, if we do get nuked, it could change the game, or it would just solidify our "relations" with the Middle East, as their leaders express their "sadness and regrets" ~~as they laugh their way to the mosque.~~

Posted by ex-lib 2006-12-07 17:00|| 2006-12-07 17:00|| Front Page Top

#11 Baker pretty much trashed his reputation by attaching his name to this totally botched report. In my humble opinion.

Yeah a lot of people felt his name was mud long ago but now few who know anything can deny it.

Posted by rjschwarz 2006-12-07 17:19|| 2006-12-07 17:19|| Front Page Top

#12 ex-lib -- A "timely" observation, lol... Ever wonder why you don't hear about public health warnings in certain places?

Speculative Movie Taglines...

Me. Coli - Eeeek! Wahabbis! (dies)
Manthrax of The Living Dead - The Hosts! They're wearing turbans - and they're already dead! (dies)
Mebola Zaire - OMFG! Salafists! W3'r3 0Wn3d! W3'R3 d3@D! (dies)

Posted by .com 2006-12-07 17:44|| 2006-12-07 17:44|| Front Page Top

#13 Your forgot Texans With Chainsaws I, II, III and C

Posted by Shipman 2006-12-07 17:58|| 2006-12-07 17:58|| Front Page Top

#14 Damn that would be:

Your forgot Texans With Chainsaws Murder I, II, III and C

Posted by Shipman 2006-12-07 18:05|| 2006-12-07 18:05|| Front Page Top

#15 "The commission's message to our enemies and to our potential allies is that if enough Americans are killed, America's foreign policy elite will give up on its core values..."

...and go looking for a rationale for quitting.

"Enough Americans", in the case of Iraq, amounts to roughly the same number of Americans that were killed in recreational boating accidents during the same period.

And if THAT is all it takes to make us turn tail and skedaddle, God have mercy on us. Because the enemy sure won't.

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2006-12-07 18:09|| 2006-12-07 18:09|| Front Page Top

#16 Mr Ship person -
Imr thinkin you maybe missed the "spirit" of my post-like thingy. Perhaps it wuz too je ne sais quoishy, n'est pas?

Posted by .com 2006-12-07 18:23|| 2006-12-07 18:23|| Front Page Top

#17 Dave D.

I always compare the # of killed to how many we lost in just a few hours on 9/11/2001. We just surpassed that # recently, and it took us OVER 5 years of active war, lookin' for the baddies to reach it.

Or compared another way...how many murders were there in D.C. and San Francisco during the same timeframe, speaking of quagmires!

Posted by BA 2006-12-07 22:12|| 2006-12-07 22:12|| Front Page Top

23:57 Swamp Blondie
23:56 Zenster
23:55 Swamp Blondie
23:53 Zenster
23:52 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:26 3dc
23:26 Barbara Skolaut
23:19 3dc
23:13 3dc
23:11 3dc
23:04 CrazyFool
22:51 .com
22:46 .com
22:45 3dc
22:38 3dc
22:38 Old Patriot
22:35 JosephMendiola
22:34 Broadhead6
22:34 .com
22:31 .com
22:30 .com
22:28 Broadhead6
22:25 Broadhead6
22:24 3dc