earthward on a collision course with reality in September when Petraeus' report is released.
The GOP will spin that there has been improvement in the military aspects of the surge-which is a lie, but the political environment in Iraq is horrendous and will eventually implode.
On August 7th 2007 five more ministers announced they will no longer attend Iraqi cabinet meetings. This brings the total number of ministers who have at least partially withdrawn from
the government to 17 out of a total of 38. The latest to withdraw are members of a secular Shiite coalition led by former interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.
As of August 7th 2007 the southern Iraqi city of Basra has turned into a lawless and violent mess as three Shiite political groups are fighting for control and British forces continue to pull back from the area. Earlier this year Vice President Cheney said the oil-rich city was a place "where things are going pretty well" but a U.S. official says "it's hard now to paint Basra as a success story."
August 7th 2007 shows that Shiites are fighting Shiites in the Iraqi government as well as in urban guerrilla warfare throughout Iraq. All of the success stories are actually failures. Also, Shiites are in a different sect than the primary Sunni al-queda, and W can't even placate the 60% of Iraqis that he launched "Operation Iraqi Freedom" to provide democracy for.
43's boys in blue always tells us al-queda is our worst enemy, but things are not progressing for the Shiites either. By the way, the other 20% of Iraq, the Kurdish segment, might get involved in a war with Turkey--which, by itself, might destabilize the Middle East.
Historians will talk about big bro 43's personality. I will sum it up as the "bubble boy" is a "Gentleman's C" slacker.
Not big bro 43! He's proud of his "intellectual incuriosity" even making speeches about how only in the US of A he'd be allowed to excel despite his puny academic ability. What characteristic can be attributed for his success? How about riding on his Poppy's coat-tails and having rich, unsavory Middle East cronies buying away his failures as an oil-man.
Look at his policies. They all have that cram for the finals, disorganized, lazy characteristic. He takes all of the credit for them-even though none of his policies have accomplished anything, but he blames others for their failures. Who was responsible for the "Mission Accomplished" banner?
The article "The Rush for a Legacy" at
states "Promoting Democracy Overseas Is No Longer a Priority As State Pursues Elusive Prizes in Middle East and Korea.
In a speech to a meeting of democratic freedom fighters in Prague on June 5, President Bush announced a concrete mission for his State Department. "I have asked Secretary Rice," he said, "to send a directive to every U.S. ambassador in an unfree nation:
Seek out and meet with activists for democracy. Seek out those who demand human rights."
Nearly two months later, the cable had not been sent...
In contrast, Condoleezza Rice spent last week meeting with the Arab autocrats of the Middle East in pursuit of an entirely different agenda: "security and stability" for their unfree nations and support for a new Middle East peace process.
With less than 18 months remaining in her tenure and that of President Bush, Rice has turned her famously disciplined focus toward delivering legacy achievements. But her aims are utterly different from those with which Bush began his second term -- such
as the "freedom agenda" he restated in Prague."
Where is the CEO aspect-that of communicating with minions to do things, but staying in charge and in the loop, that big bro 43 allegedly brought to the White House. His Secretary of State's policy for the Middle East is different than his and no one acknowledges it. The lethargic lout W delegates responsibilities and then completely ignores his role.
"Democracy promotion in the Middle East is out, replaced by a belated but intense effort to broker a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians.
Even more strikingly, the "regime change" strategy that once marked Bush administration policy toward North Korea has been dropped in favor of an all-out effort to negotiate a rapprochement with dictator Kim Jong Il."
The article concludes "Is an administration hungry for redemption once again chasing diplomatic mirages?
Rice may get her legacy --let's hope so. But history is a reminder that lame-duck diplomacy can be dangerous as well as bold."
The article "The Great Man Theory" at
can't really be
considered using W as a model can it?