What are you doing with the remaining microseconds as they tick away?
Thursday, November 1, 2012
The MEC's not messianic, but he sure makes messes
Former Libyan prime minister Mahmoud Jibril says that the way the MEC regime went about facilitating the ouster of Ghaddafi and then basically ending its involvement left a power vacuum that resulted in - well, what we are now witnessing.
Borrowing a phrase from the Freedom Hater bitch book I see.
Ironically, the massive US military deployment in Iraq has created a sort of US power vacuum in the Middle East. The Bush Administration has used up all of America's good will and powers of persuasion and we can't seem to get anything else done.
Read more at http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2008/06/02-middle-east-amr
Well, let's see. In the article to which you link, the specifics offered - once one wades past paragraphs about "Bush administration heavy-handedness- are the Lebanese dialogue and the then-latest (2008) attempts at moving Syria - Israeli relations forward. And those have borne just what kind of fruit in the subsequent four years? Then there's the Saudi-brokered attempt to reconcile the two Palestinian fations, which, as the Brookings author points out, had already failed at the time of his writing. Then there was the GCC Summit's invitation to Ahmadnejad to attend in 2007. Hey, that's a positive step, yessir! At least one can say things kept going in that direction, what with Teheran hosting that 100-nation conference this years. That would be during the MEC's era of the unclenched fist. So, you see, W's policies have had very little to do with subsequent events. That's because he only tepidly advanced the correct policies and then was followed by a guy with the exact wrong policies.
Parse it, bloggie, parse it! I can link you to dozens and dozens of articles, entire books even, such as Dennis Ross'Statecraft and another title called Fiasco, the author of which whose name I can't recall, etc., etc. That allege the same things about Bush's wars. Bring on your Big Boy Bolton! Again, sad to say. Even Bush tired of your ravenous premptors.
Not only had the war “stressed the U.S. Army to the breaking point,” a study published by the Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute declared, but it had also turned out to be “an unnecessary preventive war of choice” that “created a new front in the Middle East for Islamic terrorism and diverted attention and resources away from securing the American homeland” against further attacks from Al Qaeda. The war “was not integral” to the global war on terrorism, the report concluded, but was a costly “detour from it.” From Fiasco by Thomas E. Ricks, senior Pentagon correspondent for The Washington Post
Borrowing a phrase from the Freedom Hater bitch book I see.
ReplyDeleteIronically, the massive US military deployment in Iraq has created a sort of US power vacuum in the Middle East. The Bush Administration has used up all of America's good will and powers of persuasion and we can't seem to get anything else done.
Read more at http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2008/06/02-middle-east-amr
Well, let's see. In the article to which you link, the specifics offered - once one wades past paragraphs about "Bush administration heavy-handedness- are the Lebanese dialogue and the then-latest (2008) attempts at moving Syria - Israeli relations forward. And those have borne just what kind of fruit in the subsequent four years? Then there's the Saudi-brokered attempt to reconcile the two Palestinian fations, which, as the Brookings author points out, had already failed at the time of his writing. Then there was the GCC Summit's invitation to Ahmadnejad to attend in 2007. Hey, that's a positive step, yessir! At least one can say things kept going in that direction, what with Teheran hosting that 100-nation conference this years. That would be during the MEC's era of the unclenched fist.
ReplyDeleteSo, you see, W's policies have had very little to do with subsequent events. That's because he only tepidly advanced the correct policies and then was followed by a guy with the exact wrong policies.
And this guy uses the term "Middle East peace" in his title. He's quite the prognosticator, isn't he?
ReplyDeleteParse it, bloggie, parse it! I can link you to dozens and dozens of articles, entire books even, such as Dennis Ross'Statecraft and another title called Fiasco, the author of which whose name I can't recall, etc., etc. That allege the same things about Bush's wars. Bring on your Big Boy Bolton! Again, sad to say. Even Bush tired of your ravenous premptors.
ReplyDeleteWhere you get the idea that the mideast is some kind of paragon of tranquility and goodwill is beyond me.
ReplyDeleteNot only had the war “stressed the U.S. Army to the breaking point,” a study published by the Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute declared, but it had also turned out to be “an unnecessary preventive war of choice” that “created a new front in the Middle East for Islamic terrorism and diverted attention and resources away from securing the American homeland” against further attacks from Al Qaeda. The war “was not integral” to the global war on terrorism, the report concluded, but was a costly “detour from it.” From Fiasco by Thomas E. Ricks, senior Pentagon correspondent for The Washington Post
ReplyDelete