Article

2006-12-08 Iraq

Baker-Hamilton report squeezed out of frozen mentality of Cold War

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 phil_b 2006-12-08 01:40|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 More and more I am suspecting that this B-H report is an effort to severely undermine the occupation critics.

1) It takes away ambiguity. There is strength in saying that "something must be done"; but when concrete proposals are made, they can be criticized.

2) Some of the proposals are already being done, some were already planned, and some are outrageous and obviously flawed. People love obvious choices.

3) The administration can cherry pick just those things already being done and planned anyway; this is a "have cake and eat it, too" situation.

4) The occupation has accomplished all of its major milestones, so how do you judge success or need-for-improvement (not! "failure"), at this point?

5) It does give cover to the US turning over control to Iraqi forces complete, leaving just cadres attached to their major units. The US can now just retire to its bases and let the Iraqis solve their own internal disputes the Iraqi way.

6) Even if a civil war is inevitable, the Sunnis will lose and be severely punished. While many will flee the country, the rest will just be humbled. The US can do nothing and deplore "Iraqi on Iraqi violence".

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-12-08 08:43|| 2006-12-08 08:43|| Front Page Top

#2 Agreed. Yesterday I was struck by how pretty much everybody has something bad to say about the Dhimmi Recommendations.

If you put Baker in charge, you know what to expect. If you want to put your enemies, critics, and fair-weather friends in a weak position, what else would you do?

Still, the standard by which to judge progress in WW IV is when and how we crush Syria's and Iran's ambitions -- if not crushing the countries themselves. Aligning even Democrats against Baker is a necessary but not sufficient condition for victory.

Posted by Kalle (kafir forever) 2006-12-08 10:15|| 2006-12-08 10:15|| Front Page Top

#3 James Baker is in the same category as Jimmah Kahtah, and has about as much credibility. The rest of the group was there for window dressing. Their entire effort was a waste of time, and should be flushed, along with that "koran" from Gitmo.

It's becoming pretty plain that unless the military asserts itself in Turkey, that nation is no longer our "friend" or "ally". It's time to rethink the composition of NATO. The French should be completely excluded. We should think very hard about allowing the Belgians to continue to participate. The newly-independent regions of Eastern Europe "get it", and are welcome. I'm not so sure about Turkey, Greece, Albania, or any of the former Yugoslavian territories. Maybe we need to change the name, change the mission, and include states such as Japan, Australia, and India. If we succeed in Iraq, we may have another friend there. Regardless of what happens, the United States needs to rethink who its friends are, and whom they should have what kinds of relations with. The Cold War status-quo no longer works, and Baker's bullsh$$ proves that far too many people still think along those lines.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2006-12-08 14:57|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2006-12-08 14:57|| Front Page Top

#4 If we're going to drastically alter the meaning & makeup of NATO, might as well trash the whole thing and start a new arrangement. With the collapse of the USSR, NATO largely lost its reason for being.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-12-08 20:07|| 2006-12-08 20:07|| Front Page Top

#5 See also SPACEWAR.com article = A NEW PEARL HARBOR. Victory in 44 months or CO-POTUS HILLARY???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-12-08 21:16|| 2006-12-08 21:16|| Front Page Top

#6 JosephM, dear, if you want us to read things, you need to give a link... at least for those of us not as computer savvy as you. Thanks!

Posted by trailing wife 2006-12-08 22:54|| 2006-12-08 22:54|| Front Page Top

23:58 Zenster
23:48 Zenster
23:47 Zenster
23:46 gorb
23:42 Zenster
23:36 rpg7
23:34 Brett
23:21 JosephMendiola
23:19 Zenster
23:14 JosephMendiola
23:10 Pappy
22:57 trailing wife
22:55 Alaska Paul
22:54 trailing wife
22:43 trailing wife
22:40 trailing wife
22:26 trailing wife
22:22 trailing wife
22:21 Sneaze Shaiting3550
22:20 Pappy
22:19 bombay
22:14 CrazyFool
22:00 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:56 trailing wife