Comments on: U.S. Denies Nixed Summit Is Snub

Conflicting Explanations Surround Cancellation Of Bush's High-Stakes Meeting With Iraqi Prime Minister

[grazinggoat]

Would I send my wife to this war? You might ask would I send her to WW-II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your wife to fight in them. But that question is directed in a very important way: I cannot command my wife, she does me. I have no choice. So the better question would be: would I, BushDucks21, volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer BushDucks21 to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. To a hypothetical question, I can answer, NO. And I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Hamburgerbite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those women is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is a failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish theocracy in the Middle East is a poor, ailing, dispecable effort, for sure a failure. That's why I greatly disrespect and shame those who have made the attempt--the Walkig-Liar administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons within their control or fault: traitors on the home front being a big one. Now we traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting, and for longtime.
bushducks1

[grazinggoat]

Would I send my wife to this war? You might ask would I send her to WW-II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your wife to fight in them. But that question is directed in a very important way: I cannot command my wife, she does me. I have no choice. So the better question would be: would I, BushDucks21, volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer BushDucks21 to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. To a hypothetical question, I can answer, NO. And I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Hamburgerbite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those women is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is a failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish theocracy in the Middle East is a poor, ailing, dispecable effort, for sure a failure. That's why I greatly disrespect and shame those who have made the attempt--the Walkig-Liar administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons within their control or fault: traitors on the home front being a big one. Now we traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting, and for longtime.
bushducks1

[alphaa10-2009]

creeper00 said, "I can't help but worry about what the president's response to this snub from al Maliki is going to be... His reactions seem to be those of a schoolyard bully. When he's crossed he has a tendency to lash out in anger... Am I the only one who sees that as ominous?
---

Not by any means, and many worry about a Bush who lacks personal as well as political maturity, and are deeply concerned about his reactions (which often replace responses) under pressure. Kissinger wondered about Nixon under the same circumstances.

So, we need to give real diplomats and real diplomacy a chance to heal Iraq. That process unfortunately depends on other hotheads besides Bush, as well, so the resolution of Iraq in a diplomatic and constructive way will be very difficult. By comparison, Carter's multi-day retreat with Begin and Sadat was easy work. (At least to the extent both already had committed to the negotiation.)

If you want a picture of pressure, however, consider al-Maliki under the boot of the Sadr army on one hand, and the US Army, on the other. Al-Maliki is a Shia politician who doesn't particularly welcome being annexed by Iran, trying to reason with Sunnis convinced his security ministry is trying to kill them, one by one. His new constitution is only what could be patched together in this maelstrom, with many competing interests and voices at full volume, and that constitution says basically, "Nothing goes, unless by general consensus." Try finding consensus in Iraq.

[patriotic9]

It sounds bad but I think how bad civil war is in Iraq,It's better then a stable Iraq.Only Iraq during the time of Saddam was a country which had resisted against Iran to form an ISLAMIC EMPIRE.Islamic radicals are so lucky that they didn't have to spend a single penny or bullet to topple his govt.Our tax dollars and our soldiers lives were used to remove Saddam from power and to bring a RADICAL ISLAMIST with great ties to IRANIAN AYATOLLAHs to bring him to power on the name of DEMOCRACY.Forget the territorial boundries or differences in languages and cultures.From IRAN in the EAST to LEBANON in the WEST are very close to become an ISLAMIC EMPIRE under those AYATOLLAHs how consider us the GREATEST SATAN.According to the beliefs of SHIA MUSLIMS,their final IMAM or MESSIAH MEHDI will kill all the JEWS,CHRISTIANS and UNBELIEVERS.That plan has already been started by the killing of a CHRISTIAN LEADER in LEBANON.Christians and jews living in the MIDDLE EAST can be brought into USA or EUROPE but once those AYATOALLAHs get the control of OIL in the MIDDLE EAST,we'll have to go back to the stone age.Offcoase,Iran will be glad to talk to US about IRAQ and stability in the region,since Iran has a WIN WIN situation.

[aeasus]

Thank You

I believe there is more here then what meets the eye. But the problem right now is the lives it costs

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to World War II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. To a hypothetical, I can answer, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front being a big one. Now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting.

[frankly6]

Aeasus

Well said

[frankly6]

Anyone care to take a guess why Bush couldn't have a conference on Iraq in Iraq? Why Jordan?

[ceekuei]

Call it whatever. A snub, rescheduling, and anything in between. The fact remains that nobody wants to be seen with an international certified loser whose credibility is sinking faster than the Titanic. When he lied to invade and the invasion turned out to be a disaster, he needs to lie again to get out. Bush is clueless and is showing. He is a man of straw. Watching him on TV struggling to explain himself on the bloody mess he as created is just too painful. This "summit" would be full of form and no substance. It is shadow boxing at its worst. Bush has to do it or else he stands to annoy dad and friends, and not forgetting Mother Bush too!

[aeasus]

Time to leave Iraq? Or maybe it's time we worked with Iran to solve Middle East concerns,instead trying to bully them.
How can it be alright to refuse to listen to someone offering to help while casualties are mounting?

Ahmadinejad vowed that Iran "will stand by its Iraqi brothers," saying "no one can divide nations of Iran and Iraq."

[creeper00]

I can't help but worry about what the president's response to this snub from al Maliki is going to be. His reactions seem to be those of a schoolyard bully. When he's crossed he has a tendency to lash out in anger. For an example of this, see the swift removal of General Eric Shinseki after he questioned the level of troop strength necessary to secure Iraq after the invasion. Or the "outing" of CIA Agent Valerie Plame when her husband dared to expose the administration's lies about Nigerian yellowcake uranium.

Mr. Bush has suffered a string of public humiliations over the past few weeks. The corner he's backing into is getting tighter and tighter. Am I the only one who sees that as ominous?

To diverinnl and SearingTruth: I enjoyed your exchange on this board. Thanks for keeping it civil.

To all who are frustrated by the repetitious posts: I carry on an occasional e-mail exchange with one of the editors of CBSNews. He's been made aware of the problem. Perhaps we'll see some relief. In the meantime, it would appear that e-mailing someone directly may be more likely to yield results than "report this comment."

[frankly6]

When the Bush administration has to come out and say no snub. It's pretty much a gaurantee that this was a big time SNUB!


SNUB




SNUB

[alphaa10-2009]

jh6379 said, "Couric is not so bad looking. It could be an ugly old timer's face..."
---
But Couric also will be old one day. As she gains in professional ability and acquires a few lines and jowls here and there, does she lose value to CBS? Was that the argument for dismissing Bob Schieffer's acumen with a big gold watch and a thank you?! Those who judge professionalism by looks are on the wrong channel, and very superficial one.

Professional beauty and accomplishment comes in many packages, as distinguished as Schieffer or Helen Thomas. We do ourselves injury when we do not honor their experience, judgment and fine contributions.

[frankly6]

braindead


I often wonder who the 30 or so percent of Americans that support Bush are. I mean, it's clear enough to the rest of us that he's a dishonest, icompetent moron. However, after your reading your post I understand. Birds of a feather really do flock together.

Thanks for giving me clarity on that.

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to World War II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. To a hypothetical, I can answer, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front being a big one. Now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?...I'm waiting.

[alphaa10-2009]

carolinamac said, "While your view is well articulated, and you seem to have considered your position, surely you can see that while the intentions may have been noble, failure cannot be entirely the fault of those outside of the administration..."
---

Sorry, Carolinamac, apparently my parody of the bushrock1 post has gone below the radar of quite a few. Read it again, and you will see how it differs from the original. If you missed the bushrock1 post, another will pop up in the hour.

Just for the record, I am in agreement with those opposed to the Iraq debacle, on almost every point.

Cease fire! (I know now how Pat Tillman felt...)

[frankly6]

braindead

You are all hate and no substance. Your whole thing is just an opinion piece. All you proove is that anyone can come here and blow a lot of hot air. You back nothing up with factual, verifiable information.

You have an opinion that's clear. But it's not an informed one.

[nothappyatall]

"Us denies nixed summit is a snub"

"The abrupt cancellation was an almost unheard-of development in the high-level diplomatic circles of a U.S. president, a king and a prime minister. There was confusion %u2014 and conflicting explanations %u2014about what happened."

Translated into plain English from Bush backpedalling it says:

IT'S A SNUB, because Bush is a sinking ship with no life boats, no crew and no engine power, she's hit an inceburg captain and she's going down FAST!

[alphaa10-2009]

pakaal said, "Add Alphaa10 to the list of bushrocks1 pseudonyms.... I suppose if he posts under enough different names he can effectively push all other comments off the boards. Someone was saying something about 'free speech'? Shouting down other voices is about as unAmerican as you get. I wonder if he realizes that? He certainly doesn't seem to care, if indeed he does realize it at all."
---
Pakaal, your friendly fire is off the mark. You easily can find my other posts on any given day under my own name, and I never have owned more than one posting account at CBS.

The post to which you may object is a parody of the hourly posts of one aptly-named "bushrock1". His somewhat meandering original remarks were intended as a John Wayneish "from the high ground" monologue about the American flag. I have to admit, even parody rags some blue types on this blog.

I just returned after hours away from this thread and I am sure to find others have missed the parody, too.

[frankly6]

Now for the loosers in the Iraq debacle:

USA- by the time we leave Iraq, if we leave, we will have spent at least 1 trillion dollars(borrowed money from China), lost thousands of lives and thousands more will come back broken. We are steadily loosing credibility and influence in the world which will no doubt hurt us economicly as well.

The Iraqi People- Estimates are that at least 600,000 of them have died as a direct result of the invasion and ocupation of their country. 16 billion US taxpayer dollars have been spent on reconstruction and the most basic infrastructural needs like roads, electricity, sewage, fuel, oil production and refinement are below pre-war levels.