To trans-parere re: "plus ca change"

Submitted by mariana (United States), Dec 11, 2006 at 16:09

Your response is interesting. Concerning: "Political correctness is the moral imperative not; the doing of the right thing for the right reasons regardless of the cost...." I fail to see how any of the imperatives set forth in the ISG report can be considered "the right thing for the right reasons......," and wonder: by what definition can the disintegration of Lebanon and Israel, the inevitable, ultimate extension of Mr. Baker's bought and paid for sagacity, be considered "the right thing?" and which "reasons" involved, do you consider "right?"

Bush was doing just fine until he sent into Iraq, under State Dept. auspices, Mr. Bremer as Viceroy. When the military was dispensing funds for work on the ground they were supervising, positive, measurable things were happening. Another error, at the same time, was downplaying Rumsfeld and discontinuation the "Rumsfeld follies" -which news conferences kept Bush's message up front and on the straight and narrow. When they pulled him back, the anti-Bush 5th column [media, dems, anti-semites, arabists and the permanent foreign policy establishment] got the upper hand and the American people had no counterbalancing message.

Another omission was the Admin's inability to articulate the real battle here; whether for fear of "scaring" people, worrying about world opinion or disbelieving the ability of the people to comprehend the extent of the real struggle, I do not know; but, this is a regional and world war and it has been such since at least the early 90's when war was declared on the US and Clinton refused to acknowledge it. Actually, the beginning of these "forces of jihad" having been put into motion, can probably more accurately be traced back to the 1977 demonstrations in Iran and the subsequent events- again precipitated by ignorance of and dismissal by another Democrat president [Carter].

All of their wunderkind contributed to this report, from Palley and Brezinsky to Richardson and Madeline Dimwit, with the same pc mindsets, still selling utopian visions of peace where there is none. Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Iran et al, have been unsuccessfully attempting to link "Iraq" to "Israel" forever, and, thanks to the well paid Mr. Baker and the fools fronting for his "consensus," the link is ostensibly made: Serve up Israel and Lebanon on a platter for the ever squabbling "Arab Street" to carve up, and "there will be peace in our time."

Your last paragraph was not even worthy of the rest of your response, so I've chosen to ignore it. Notwithstanding the wails and moans over 2800 American dead in 4 years, the valorous volunteers protecting us want to do the job "right" and finish it. If anyone had suggested that we'd be at war in the middle east for 4 years with ONLY 2800 dead [go back and read the famous Scocroft letter], they'd have been laughed off the stage. The military understand this, mourn their dead and understand that this fight will either happen in Iraq and the M/E or in NY and LA, and that every day that passes ups the price in blood Americans and Israeli's will be forced, inevitably to pay. I've tried on a Chador and it's incredibly uncomfortable and looks like H-eck! Furthermore, "submission" was not a lesson passed on to me by my father. It's probably time for -at least- women to start paying attention to the ramifications of this "stuff." ma

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".