Lieberman: Iraqi Opposition To U.S. Security Agreement Is ‘A Sign Of Our Success In Iraq’
Lieberman: Iraqi Opposition To U.S. Security Agreement Is ‘A Sign Of Our Success In Iraq’
The Bush administration is currently trying to push Iraqis into accepting a long-term security agreement that would “perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely.” The U.S. demands include nearly 60 permanent bases in Iraq, immunity for foreign contractors, and control over air space.
Iraqi opposition to this bill is growing so intense that Iraqi parliament member Nadeem al-Jaberi recently testified to the House that 70 percent of Iraqis are in favor of the withdrawal of U.S. troops. Some more voices of opposition from prominent Iraqi officials:
“The Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq.” — Sami al-Askari, a senior Shiite politician on parliament’s foreign relations committee who is close to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki
“We rejected the whole thing from the beginning. In my point of view, it would just be a new occupation with an Iraqi signature.” — Jalal al-Din al-Saghir, a senior lawmaker from the Supreme Council
“What the U.S. wants is to take the current status quo and try to regulate it in a new agreement. … Signing the agreement would mean that the Iraqi government had given up its sovereignty by its own consent. And that will never happen.” — Haider al-Abadi, a parliament member from Maliki’s Dawa party
As Kevin Drum notes, these lawmakers are “not the faction that hates us, but the faction that supposedly likes us.” Iranian Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also recently urged Maliki to reject any U.S. agreement.
This is all very bad news…unless you’re a member of the Bush administration or one of its close allies. In a McCain campaign conference call today, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) told reporters that this opposition was actually a sign of the Bush administration’s “success” in the war:
The second thing I’d say is the very fact that we’re at a point where the Iraqi leadership wants to negotiate this agreement is a sign of our success in Iraq, which is that Iraq now has a sovereign, independent, self-government.
Listen here (at approximately 11:45):
This talking point is quickly making the rounds. Today, President Bush also said this opposition shows that Iraq is a “vibrant democracy” because “people are debating.” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said it was a “very positive thing” that Iraqis were “using politics and the press as a way to get their message out.”
No matter what happens in Iraq, it’s always good news to the Bush administration and the McCain campaign.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
stupid old Joe
June 11th, 2008 at 4:17 pmstupid old Joe
June 11th, 2008 at 4:17 pmlooks like gramps is having a bowel movement.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:18 pmLess violence in Iraq? Means we’re winning.
More violence in Iraq? Means we’re winning.
That’s right; I’d forgotten about that principle.
Iraqis want us to stay? We’ll stay.
Iraqis want us to leave? We’ll stay.
Saves so much wear-and-tear on the brain.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:19 pmDamn! It sure does, doesn’t it?
Looks like he’s delivering a Buckie Boy monologue.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:20 pmviewing opposition to “legally” turn Iraq into a literal colony of the USA is like calling the Pearl Harbor disaster a success.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:21 pmYou know, you can take a turd, and put feathers and a beak on it and call it an Eagle…
But, in the end, it’s still a turd
June 11th, 2008 at 4:21 pmIraqis voicing opposition. It something that wouldn’t have happened under Saddam. Democracy for Iraqis is not a bad thing. It’s progress.
That being said, if the Iraqi leadership decides Americans should leave, we should go.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:21 pmNow that’s laughable! Comedy is your calling, Joe. Pretty soon the slaves will want off the plantation…
June 11th, 2008 at 4:22 pmraynman; EEEEWWWW!
Did you REALLY HAVE to go there?
I will NEVER be able to look at another bird again.
:-)
June 11th, 2008 at 4:23 pmJoe would trumpet another terrorist attack on US soil as a sign that we’re winning in Iraq. Liebrman’s spinning would be the envy of Enrico Fermi.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:25 pmthe American people are tired of you, you old crusty F@#k! I am the American people and I say STFU!
June 11th, 2008 at 4:26 pmDumb Question:
Saddam Husein opposed a US presence in Iraq even more.
So wouldn’t Saddam being in power be a sign of our success in Iraq.
So we could have avoided the whole thing, stayed home, munched cheetos and been more effective in Iraq than we are now ?
OTOH - now that we’ve bombed Iraq into the stone ages, how are they going to resist us ?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:26 pmLividLib Says:
looks like gramps is having a bowel movement
hahahaha!
June 11th, 2008 at 4:27 pmSo let me see if I understand Smokin’ Joe’s logic…
They don’t want us there.
The fact that they don’t want us there means that they are creating an independent government.
Therefore, we have to stay because we need to make sure their government is supported.
By the troops.
And permanent bases.
That their new, independent government doesn’t want.
Did I get that right!
Idiots.
PEACE
June 11th, 2008 at 4:28 pmAt what point will you admit that Iraqis want us to leave, backup? Obviously an ordinary poll of the citizenry won’t do, so, will it take a simple act of the parliament? Will that act have to pass unanimously? Will Maliki have to sign on? What will it take?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:28 pmHow delusional can Lieberman get? Apparently quite so, and we haven’t seen the end of it.
It seems to Ol’ Joe that every side of every issue is evidence of our success in Iraq. They love us? Success. They hate our guts? Still a success. More deaths; less deaths - doesn’t matter as both are a sign that the decisions the administration has made are successful. Up/Down/Sideways - all good news to Joe.
Lieberman demonstrates all the intelligence and grace of Dr. Dolittle’s pushmi-pullyu.* (And don’t forget that this is the guy who is whispering in McCain’s ear!)
* If you’ve forgotten, the pushmi-pullyu (pronounced “push-me-pull-you”) is a fictional creature in the Doctor Dolittle stories. It is an antelope which has two heads at opposite ends of the body. When it tries to move, both heads try to go in opposite directions.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:31 pmbackup Says:
Iraqis voicing opposition. It something that wouldn’t have happened under Saddam. Democracy for Iraqis is not a bad thing. It’s progress.
That being said, if the Iraqi leadership decides Americans should leave, we should go.
They’ve been voicing opposition since the invasion, backup. Considering the lack of any result, it doesn’t sound much like progress. Letting people speak is relatively easy, paying attention to what they say is something this administration simply doesn’t do.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:31 pmJoey was just joking. that’s why he’s laughing.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:33 pmMcGramps just doesn’t get it. that’s why he’s sitting there with that blank look on his face soiling himself.
ralph the wonder llama Says:
——————————————————————————–
backup Says:
Democracy for Iraqis is not a bad thing. It’s progress.
That being said, if the Iraqi leadership decides Americans should leave, we should go.
At what point will you admit that Iraqis want us to leave, backup? Obviously an ordinary poll of the citizenry won’t do, so, will it take a simple act of the parliament? Will that act have to pass unanimously? Will Maliki have to sign on? What will it take?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:33 pm–
Well obviously a poll of the citizenry won’t do. That would be too democratic
Well, we should leave and leave now since a majority of the Iraq parliament want us out. We should leave and leave now since there is an effective government in place. We should leave now since the majority of the Iraqi people do not want us there. Why then can McCain not tell us when we can expect to bring a substantial majority of our troops home?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:34 pmright, can someone please ask lieberman what he thinks of the massive pro-hezbollah rallies that occured in iraq when his real home country attacked lebanon? isnt that just the sort of thing he condemned the palesentitians for doing?
its almost poetic justice, and it IS the height of irony that his crusade in iraq has created a relatively safe environment for a pro-iranian anti-israeli government to flourish…
June 11th, 2008 at 4:35 pmsaddam gave lip service to the palestinians cause and small amounts of the money to families that had thier houses destoyed by israel but he never actively worked to counteract the israeilis in the region like iran did…
Can someone photoshop some drool coming out of McCain’s mouth? Or was it already photoshopped out?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:35 pmIt’s pretty sick when things are going great in Iraq (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html) and we ARE winning and the left libs just can’t accept and admit it because they desperately want us to lose. It’s sick when libs applaud and are happy when more soldiers are killed because that means that THEY are winning. How can anyone be like you wacked out libs are???
June 11th, 2008 at 4:37 pmJohn Kerry cracks me up.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:38 pmJohn Kerry, Iraq was claimed to be sovereign by Condi and Bush a few years ago. What is there to win?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:40 pmHow can anyone be like you wacked out libs are???
And how whacked out are you, taking the name of a democrat?
Still no political reconciliation in Iraq, still no progress - but keep polishing that turd!
June 11th, 2008 at 4:40 pmTroll John Kerry is a hoot. They don’t make trolls like that anymore.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:40 pm>Democracy for Iraqis is not a bad thing.
> It’s progress.
Giving democracy to a group of people before you educate them isnt progress. Its a step backward. A populace which is mostly ignorant and trapped in backward beleifs isnt someone you want running things. This is pretty much why the south should have been permanently disenfranchised after they tried to suceed (??) (I’m from the south and I can still honestly say this) We’re a bunch of hillbillies. Many of us are inbred.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:42 pmIm embarassed to say I;m from the south and I can honestly say I would gladly disenfranchise myself in order to keep the vote out of the hands of people who are almost completely and wholly ignorant and refuse to think outside the confines of their narrow reality. I dont think you can give democracy to a populace which is mostly ignorant anymore than you can give it to a pack of wolves and expect them to do the right thing..
“The Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq.” — Sami al-Askari, a senior Shiite politician
Huh?…lead to colonization??? Iraq is already an occupied colony! Vote Republican, and statehood will be next.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:42 pmI am SOOOO hoping that Johnny Boy picks JoeL (I - Israel) for his VeeP. Their Campaign slogan would be “Dumb and Dumber - YOU figure out which is which”
June 11th, 2008 at 4:42 pmAs usual the politicos are conflating the war on terror and the nation building program so duped people like John Kerry will support nation building even though the same people claimed Iraq was sovereign and free.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:43 pm> and we ARE winning
they just gave a VIP welcome to the iranian president the other day. thats something that never would have happened before we invaded? does a iraqi governmetn allied with iran, financed by us, count in your definition of winning?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:43 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
——————————————————————————–
backup Says:
Iraqis voicing opposition. It something that wouldn’t have happened under Saddam. Democracy for Iraqis is not a bad thing. It’s progress.
That being said, if the Iraqi leadership decides Americans should leave, we should go.
At what point will you admit that Iraqis want us to leave, backup? Obviously an ordinary poll of the citizenry won’t do, so, will it take a simple act of the parliament? Will that act have to pass unanimously? Will Maliki have to sign on? What will it take?
For me? It would take legislation introduced in the Iraqi Parliament that passed with a 2/3rd majority, just as a treaty is ratified in the Senate.
Note: Doing this without Congress is wrong. Whatever agreement is made will have no binding authority should Obama win. Also, the terms of this are crap. I can see some bases for a residual force, some kind of joint control of air space (it will take a decade for Iraq to field an air force, some kind of arrangement must be made or no one will control their air space) and there should be no immunity for foreign contractors.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:43 pmHey Backup, your a reasonable man..heres a question for ya..
June 11th, 2008 at 4:47 pmdid you ever figure out what percent of our arab mideast allies are democracies? Do you ever wander why more of them arent? Do you ever wonder why we cant (or wont) even make those countries democratic but we think we can get good results from doing so via the barrell of a gun?
Well said Tired of Being Lied To.
So, if it’s a positive thing when Iraqi politians speak up, I guess that when they demand back all those billions ($50B)being held hostage in the NY Federal Reserve Bank it’ll be a sure sign of success!
Did you know that last year Iraqi officials tried to diversify those holdings by converting some of the amount from American dollars to Euros? That plan “was vetoed by the US Treasury because American officials feared it would
June 11th, 2008 at 4:47 pmshow lack of confidence in the dollar” and “Iraqi officials say the consequence of the American action was to lose Iraq the equivalent of $5bn”.
Keltoi, why do you require a 2/3 majority of a sovereign political body to ask us to leave their soil?
Shouldn’t a simple majority suffice? Shouldn’t passage of an unambiguous act declaring Iraq’s desire that we vacate their soil be enough?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:47 pmhttp://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1413
Official Spokesman for the Iraqi Government Ali al-Dabbagh said, “Currently, there is open talk on the need to look for alternatives to the long-term security agreement between Iraq and the United States.”
Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat by phone from his office in Baghdad, Al-Dabbagh said, “At its meeting today [3 June], the Council of Ministers discussed the objections to the provisions of the agreement. There should be agreement between two fully sovereign countries respecting the Iraqi people’s rights and sovereignty or no agreement at all.” He emphasized, “We do not need an agreement that compromises our sovereignty and harms our people’s rights.”
The Iraqis feel rather strongly about our continued occupation there, and the free reign that our troops and contractors are given. Recently, representatives of Iraq’s parliament visited DC in an effort to clear up some of the misconceptions that their American political counterparts may have. They expressed opposition to the US-proposed SOFA. They also expressed concerns as to why the US felt the need for a long-term military presence. They felt that the US invasion up to this point has not made the country better, and that our current presence contributes to instability. One of the main goals of the long-term military presence in Iraq is to protect them from outside threats. However, the Iraqi government has stated that they do not feel there are outside threats that are a danger to Iran. They have stated that they are capable of defending themselves against foreign threats, and solving their own problems.
Al-Dabbagh said, “The Iraqi Government’s vision differs from that of the Americans who think that the agreement will give them almost totally a free hand in Iraq and that, as a military force, they must have absolute powers. This stand contravenes Iraqi sovereignty and our people’s rights. No Iraqi political force or party would accept this. The issue of the country’s sovereignty and people’s rights cannot be compromised at all. It is not subject to discussion or even mere talk
June 11th, 2008 at 4:49 pmif “winning” means more parades for Iranian heads of state, financed by my tax dollars, I think i’d rather “lose” and save my money..
June 11th, 2008 at 4:49 pmSo let me see if I understand Smokin’ Joe’s logic…
Warning: this act could be hazardous to your mental health.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:51 pmhttp://www.washingtonindependent.com/view/iraqi5
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) asked a simple-enough question: did the two Iraqi parliamentarians think the U.S. should have invaded? He seemed unprepared for the answer.
“I would prefer if it didn’t happen, because it led to the destruction of the country,” al-Ulayyan said. “The U.S. got rid of one person. It put in hundreds of persons that are worse than Saddam Hussein. Unfortunately, now Iran is going into Iraq, and this is under the umbrella of the United States.”
Asked if the U.S. should withdraw, a somewhat-exasperated Jaberi said, “The presence of foreign forces at this time may not be very useful in Iraq… it will be a source of instability in both Iraq and the region.”
June 11th, 2008 at 4:51 pmbackUP a reasonable man?
BWAAAAHHHAAAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAAA!
June 11th, 2008 at 4:54 pm#41: Chris L.
Sounds like the perfect campaign ad. Make it into one and keep running it, ad nauseum.
What do you guys think?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:56 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
——————————————————————————–
Keltoi, why do you require a 2/3 majority of a sovereign political body to ask us to leave their soil?
Shouldn’t a simple majority suffice? Shouldn’t passage of an unambiguous act declaring Iraq’s desire that we vacate their soil be enough?
Well, I was using our benchmark for treaty ratification. And considering the very serious consequences that could follow our up and leaving, I am not sure a simple majority should cut it. And opinion polls aren’t good enough, the stakes are too high. For good or for ill, Iraqis have voted these Parliamentarians into office to represent them. If the political will is really there to take off the training wheels and show us the door, 2/3 majority should not be hard to muster.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:56 pmIf we are winning, like the uberTroll John Kerry says, why do the Iranians visit Bagdad whenever they wish and our politicians need to ’secretly’ be delivered to bagdad? If we are winning, should not that scenario be turned around? Why are the winners hiding and the loser walking around shopping for $5.00 rugs?
June 11th, 2008 at 4:57 pmJohn Kerry thinks we are fighting Iraq to defeat Al Qaeda.
Right…Al Qaeda isnt even based in Iraq.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:58 pmI can’t wait for the real success, when the Iraqis tell us to GFO! And turn the Embassy into the J. Lepetamaine institute for the criminally insane.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:59 pmKeltoi Says:
For good or for ill, Iraqis have voted these Parliamentarians into office to represent them. If the political will is really there to take off the training wheels and show us the door, 2/3 majority should not be hard to muster.
Thats a very good point - very good. I would also add that our consciences will be more comforted if we knew that 2/3 of Iraqis felt a certain way; rather than merely 50%. We could be reasonably assured that the decision supported by 2/3 of the citizens would be a favorable one, not one jammed down their throats.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:00 pmThe Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq.”
Don’t anybody tell Sami al-Askari that’s already happened…Shhhh.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:01 pmFor good or for ill, Iraqis have voted these Parliamentarians into office to represent them.
Not Exactly. The Sunnis Boycotted the election, and voted instead with their car bombs.
Provincial elections are set for October. The Sunnis will probably participate this time.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:03 pm>backUP a reasonable man?
compared to most of the nuckledraggers around here, hes a rocket scientist merely by the fact he can speak in complete sentences.
beleive it or not i actually enjoy discussing things with peopel who disagree as long as they make some small semblance of trying to maintain a coherent argument.. i dont ask for much, personally,
June 11th, 2008 at 5:04 pm>backUP a reasonable man?
compared to most of the nuckledraggers around here, hes a rocket scientist merely by the fact he can speak in complete sentences.
beleive it or not i actually enjoy discussing things with peopel who disagree as long as they make some small semblance of trying to maintain a coherent argument.. i dont ask for much, personally,
June 11th, 2008 at 5:04 pmAnd I assume when we build all those 58 bases in Iraq, it will be solely for the financial pleasure of Halliburton and they will be turned over to the Iraqis before we ever put an Amurikan in them.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:04 pmStratRat Says:
Thats a very good point - very good. I would also add that our consciences will be more comforted if we knew that 2/3 of Iraqis felt a certain way; rather than merely 50%. We could be reasonably assured that the decision supported by 2/3 of the citizens would be a favorable one, not one jammed down their throats.
And also, the demographics of Iraq argue for it. If it is a simple majority, the Shiites all by themselves could order us out, leaving the Kurds and Sunnis at their mercy. With a 2/3 vote at least one of the major minority blocs has to want us to go and trust the Shiites aren’t going to instantly turn on them.
Granted, the Shiites are badly fragmented themselves, but no one sect should be able to tell us to go if the others don’t agree, IMHO.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:04 pm“…Iraq now has a sovereign, independent, self-government.”
I don’t think Jow knows what ’sovereign’ or ‘independent’ means.
We live in a sovereign and independent nation. Does anyone want a foreign military force here? Do we need to vote on it?
June 11th, 2008 at 5:05 pmBadger Says:
——————————————————————————–
For good or for ill, Iraqis have voted these Parliamentarians into office to represent them.
Not Exactly. The Sunnis Boycotted the election, and voted instead with their car bombs.
Provincial elections are set for October. The Sunnis will probably participate this time.
Good point, and their Sheiks have acknowledged boycotting the elections was a mistake. Hopefully they do participate this time and there will be more pluralism as a result.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:07 pmYou make a good argument, Keltoi, but it doesn’t sound much like you consider Iraq a sovereign nation.
Or at least, not one whose sovereignty deserves respect.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:10 pmKeltoi says:
Granted, the Shiites are badly fragmented themselves, but no one sect should be able to tell us to go if the others don’t agree, IMHO.
Keltoi has a very good grasp of the facts and the players in Iraq. It is important that the various minority blocs feel they have a voice in the process. They will be more apt to contribute to the political process if they sense inclusion.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:14 pmCaption contest:
I can’t believe I ate the whole thing! Anyone have an Alka-Seltzer?
June 11th, 2008 at 5:19 pmWith oil at $130 a bbl, Iraq is sitting on a FORTUNE.
We can only hope that the various warring factions have finally realized that their is enough wealth for all to participate.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:20 pmI was never a big Lieberman fan, but, his transformation into a neocon is embarrassing. I wonder if the brain damage is caused by booze, or, do they actually lobotomize converts?
June 11th, 2008 at 5:21 pmWould someone please press the reset switch on McWirestouching? Lift the flap of skin and it’s the little red button behind his right ear.
Thanks.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:21 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
You make a good argument, Keltoi, but it doesn’t sound much like you consider Iraq a sovereign nation.
Or at least, not one whose sovereignty deserves respect.
Well, sovereignty is a complicated and somewhat seperate issue. Note, though, that if their duly elected government votes for us to get the hell out, we should go.
Sovereignty. Should I respect the sovereignty of Burma, which murders its own people with utter glee? I find that hard to do. If I lived in Burma, would I be glad the international community respected the “sovereignty” of the Junta and didn’t bring me life saving food, medicine and water after the cyclone? Ditto refugees in Darfur. It is tricky.
No, I am not advocating overthrowing all repressive regimes in the world. But “sovereignty” is not something that automatically commands respect, IMHO.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:22 pmBadger Says:
With oil at $130 a bbl, Iraq is sitting on a FORTUNE.
We can only hope that the various warring factions have finally realized that their is enough wealth for all to participate.
Not if you include KBH, the GOP, blackwater, etc… After they get done at the trough, there ain’t gonna be nuthin’ left.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:24 pmKeltoi, are you suggesting we invade Myanmar?
Do they have oil?
June 11th, 2008 at 5:24 pmNO NO NO!!!! It’s the button behind his LEFT ear.
The button behind his right ear engages the repeating “My friends” circuit. We don’t want that.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:26 pmNo, I am not advocating overthrowing all repressive regimes in the world. But “sovereignty” is not something that automatically commands respect, IMHO.
And in addition, it is the job of those blocs (shia, sunni, kurds, etc) to figure this out on their own. We have delivered democracy to Iraq at the point of a gun. It is vital the minority factions settle this issue for themselves. Iraq cannot be free if only a portion of the citizens participate in the democratic process.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:27 pmTheir self delusion is astounding. Most Americans want us out, most Iraqis want us out, most of our allies want us out, most of our enemies want us out and Bushco claims that’s reason to stay and “build on success”.
How the Hell does a quarter of this country still buy this crap if it’s attributable to brain damage or disease?
June 11th, 2008 at 5:27 pmOops! that should be “not attributable”.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:30 pmthe very fact that we’re at a point where the Iraqi leadership wants to negotiate this agreement is a sign of our success in Iraq, which is that Iraq now has a sovereign, independent, self-government.
So we can leave now?
June 11th, 2008 at 5:31 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
——————————————————————————–
Keltoi, are you suggesting we invade Myanmar?
Do they have oil?
Nope, too late now, we’ll never know how many people died that we could have helped.
And no, they don’t. Neither does Darfur, Rwanda…
Have a good day, I’m out.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:31 pmThe total “Black is White, War is Peace” thinking of these idiots is mind boggling.
This is the new opposite world we are living in.
How’s it feel to be raped by the Oil Speculators?
Just another FUN PRODUCT brought to you by Bushco.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:32 pmSince World War II, there have been a great many Repressive Regimes. During the Cold War, some were ours, some were the Soviets. Our CIA overthrew quite a few, starting with the democratically Government of Iran in 1953.
None have been overthrown overtly with an Armed Invasion until Bush did it to Iraq. This was a very dangerous precedent…opening Pandora’s box…and achieving unexpected (to Bush anyhow)consequences, like the rise in Iranian Influence.
There’s a reason why the world condems armed overthrow of a country by a foreign power, in spite of the many bad guys running regimes in this world. How would the US like to be invaded by someone to End Slavery in the 19th century.
If Kermit Roosevelt and his CIA agents hadn’t precipitated the overthrow of Mosedegh in 1953, Iran today might be a thriving Islamic democracy in the Middle East.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:37 pmSorry ralph, it’s his left, my right. I knew that.
While you are at it, there’s a hesitation between the end of the punch line and the smile when the McCatatonic is in speech mode, see if that bad lag could be shortened.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:48 pmDang it, Keltoi, you slippery so and so. I can’t let you leave with that shot. Your tacit support for the notion that the heavy resistance to Bush and Maliki’s little sweetheart argues in favor of staying the course is ridiculous on any level.
Second, though the introduction of the World’s other troubled spots to this topic is largely irrelevent, I would like to point out that any discussion of U.S. reaction to any crisis must consider the role our occupation of Iraq has played in our growing inability to influence World events outside the Mideast.
Who knows? The government of Myanmar may have welcomed the U.S. military if we hadn’t established a reputation for staying where we’re not wanted. And maybe other oppressors would take more notice if we didn’t have countless foreign nationals in secret prisons?
June 11th, 2008 at 5:51 pmGet RUCerious in there to fix it, I think it’s just bad code, not bad wiring,
Shit, I though we had that model working pretty well. Must be obsolete. It’s too late now, we have to go with the candidate we have not the one we want.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:51 pmDamn. Look at that coger. And to think I thought it was Dole that ran the campaign of the dead
June 11th, 2008 at 5:57 pmWeekend at Bernies?
June 11th, 2008 at 6:06 pmToday, President Bush also said this opposition shows that Iraq is a “vibrant democracy” because “people are debating.”
_______
Wow! What a development! Thanks to George Bush, Arabs are now debating about POLITICS!
CAN YOU BELIEVE IT???
What will they tell us next - that thanks to George Bush, the Earth is an Oblate Spheroid???
June 11th, 2008 at 7:40 pmWhen one looks for a silver lining where none exists they can say some pretty silly things and Joe Lieberman is no exception.
June 12th, 2008 at 12:58 am.
Is this “WINNING THEIR HEARTS AND MINDS”?
.
June 12th, 2008 at 3:08 am