January 13, 2007

Flailing

I haven't had much to say about Iraq lately because it just seems too hopeless and depressing. The Bush Administration is obviously just flailing around, trying to run out the clock.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

10 comments:

Simon said...

Bill Lind thinks Bush isn't so much trying to run out the clock, as accelerating disaster:
http://www.d-n-i.net/lind/lind_archive.htm
*sigh* I just hope Lind overestimates Iran & the Shia militias' ability to strike back against the US & UK forces in Iraq, or we're in a world of hurt.

Anonymous said...

The rest of the world has quietly had enough of us. Small example: according the UPI (Jan. 11), China "told the United States not to interfere in a possible multibillion-dollar China-Iran offshore natural gas venture."

The only way "forward" for Bush and his handlers is to engineer another 911. My blood ran cold when flack Tony Snow said there is no "planned" offensive against Syria and Iran: he repeated "planned" offensive something like three times.

No, it's not *planned*. But when they strike us unexpectedly, what can we do but respond, in sorrow and resolve, etc., etc.?

Bush and Israel want a World War so bad, they'll take it almost any way they can get it.

onetwothree said...

The real question is: Can they finesse a handover of _responsibility_ from themselves to the Democrats?

Anonymous said...

This is what a National Guardsman told me two days ago.............


He really believes that if we can control the Syrian and Iranian border, the insurgency will pipe down in a few months. He has served 18 months total over there. He used to be in the Marines, now a "weekend warrior" with the guard. He believes most of the weapons are coming from Syria and Iran.

Yet he also believes Saddam Hussein "probably" has WMD's "buried out in the desert somewhere" but was too afraid to use them against us for fear of a massive retaliation.

This guy is gung-ho patriotic and believes we are doing alot of good over there and told me that the media plays up how bad things are. He said that most tours of duty for the Army and Marines specifically arent really all that long and that Fort Campbell's guys and gals have only served eight months and are just now being called back for more.


He complained that the Guard is outfitted with 1989-M16's and Desert Storm I Hummers without the necessary armor. He told me that we had a much greater force for Gulf War One than we had for this one and that we needed more equipment and men to do this right. He thought Rumsfeld underestimated what it would take to do the job.


I state again however, this guy is very patriotic and loves America very much (which is great, but it might cloud his even-handed-assesment to a degree).


Im personally worried that an Israeli-strike on Iran (and their ensuing retaliation) might bog our kids down over there in a real widening war. No WMD's, no meeting with Atta in Czechoslovakia with Iraqi intel, and there we would be....................stuck.


I hate to say this (believe me, even the thought of pronouncing this audibly is sickening to me), but I'd rather see Hillary Clinton be president for the next two years than Bush. This man has been extrodinarily destructive to this repblic, its freedoms, its foreign policy, its financial standing, its physical security (borders), and its morale. He will go down in history as one of the all time worst. Miles

James D. Miller said...

Actually, the pessimistic scenario is that Iran and Syria feel they have complete freedom of action because they believe we would never go to war with them.

Simon said...

"The pessimistic scenario is that Iran and Syria feel they have complete freedom of action..."

I'm not sure how they would then act differently. Maybe Syria would re-occupy Lebanon, but compared to the loss of the US army in Iraq that's frankly not so bad. I don't see what Iran would do different - slow down its nuclear weapons program, maybe!

Trudy said...

My solution would be to invade Israel, kill its leaders and convert the Jews to Christianity.

SFG said...

You'd have to convert them to _Islam_ to get us anywhere. No, I think you're saying Coulter should have reserved her bile for those manipulative Jews...

Regardless of Wolfowitz and his Likud-loving buddies (and recalling that most American Jews are lefties who opposed the war), I have to put the blame on the Tushmeister. Y'know, the manipulation argument goes only so far; everybody's bugging out by now and he's still going strong. This is his hole, and he has dug the rest of us into it.

Hugo said...

Bush was just the patsy left holding the can. The neocons jumped ship, they weren't walking the plank.

As for American Jews, I think they mainly support the Democratic Party who voted overwhelmingly for the war.

What I

Anonymous said...

It seems logically faulty to elevate an emotional need for a sense of separation from the world to the point that we allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, when it is within our power to deny them.