The Bush administration really went to school on the whole Orwellian language, didn't they? When I saw they wanted "time horizons" but not timetables, I nearly gagged. I think we can all imagine the group huddle in the WH, "ok, we need a term to describe a timetable, but we cannot call it that or the Democrats and terrorists win."
Then al-Maliki endorsed Obama's 16 month timetable and the Republican heads started to asplode. This morning, I see from Petraeus that al-Maliki doesn't want what he said he wanted. And earlier, from Centcom, came a statement that al-Maliki had been misquoted.
To be fair, I have no clue what the best course of action is in Iraq. As far as I am concerned, the Bush people have left us with no good options. Likewise with Afghanistan, where I am unsure that Obama's stance is the right one there either.
But it seems clear that the Bush/McCain people are not as good at the foreign policy as they pretend. Not only is Bush now talking time-whatevers, but he is actually talking to Iran--the very same thing he accused Obama wanted to do when he called it "appeasement."
2 comments:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gQK3RojM-Q
onion news is sometimes awful close to the truth
I don't know what would be best either. I wonder if partitioning it off into autonomous or semi-autonomous regions (Kurds, Sunnis, etc.) would encourage some level of stability. I know plenty of the experts say that isn't a good idea, but the current border is fairly artificial.
Post a Comment