Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 2 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Simultaneously 'With us' and 'against us'

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)     (# of views)   No comments
Author 4348
Message winston
As Mark Twain wrote about a puzzling situation, "this is just too many for me!" That is what trying to understand the spew of propaganda about the Iraq theatre of GWOT is-and it is Rove's intention for it to be so. He knows how little effort red staters want to expend on thinking. All they'd have to do is compare recent direct quotes from the liars in W's administration to have the truth.
How can countries be in the groups-which big bro 43 describes as being mutually exclusive, of extremist Islamic jihadists who'd love to kill us, or those who are helping us combat IslamoFascism?

The article "With us' and 'against us' at

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/01/EDTORAJ8P2.DTL

states "GO FIGURE: From the White House comes the news that self-styled
anti-terrorism crusader President Bush wants to sell $20 billion in high-tech military equipment to Saudi Arabia, the source of most of the financing, and 15 of the 19 hijackers, for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States. The justification can't be that this is yet another boondoggle for the
military-industrial complex - the big winner in the war on terror - so we are told instead that the Sunni-dominated Saudi kingdom needs this weaponry to withstand a future challenge from those dastardly Shiite fellows in Iran. ...White House officials told the New York Times that Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates intend to use the occasion of their joint visit to Saudi Arabia "to press the Saudis to do more to
help Iraq's Shiite-dominated government."

Huh? Why in the world would the Sunnis, who control Saudi Arabia and are frightened to their bones of Shiites throughout the Persian Gulf, be party to consolidating Shiite power in Iraq?
To complete the circle of madness, White House officials tell reporters that the hope of the latest arms sale program is that the Saudis will be so thrilled with their new weapons that they will stop funding the Sunni insurgents who are killing Americans. The absurdity of this position is that it makes the Saudis the big winners in the war on terror, yet expects them to cut out behavior that has played so handsomely to the kingdom's advantage. The nation which was most directly responsible for spawning the original al Qaeda attacks on the United states, and which has since helped finance the violence in Iraq, is now being rewarded with a long-sought weapons modernization package. Thus, a new generation of deadly toys finds its way into the volatile Mideast."

The article "Arms for 'Stability'-President Bush re-embraces the Middle East
strategy he once repudiated.'" at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/31/AR2007073101763.html

states "The real point, as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice put it at the
beginning of a regional tour, is "to affirm the importance of this region to the
United States . . . in what is a complicated time." Though Ms. Rice didn't spell it out, one of the complications is the likelihood that the United states will draw down forces or retreat altogether from Iraq in the next year or so. The military packages can be seen as part of an effort to contain the resulting damage to U.S. influence in the Middle East. It nevertheless should be clear that the administration's initiative amounts to an unblushing return to the regional strategy that President Bush and Ms. Rice herself explicitly repudiated two years ago. Once again, the United States will use military aid to bolster autocratic Arab regimes in the name of regional "security and stability." Remarkably, Ms. Rice used those very words on Tuesday, in direct contradiction of her previous statements. "On September 11," she said in a June 2005 appearance in Cairo, "we realized that our policies to try and promote what we thought was stability in the Middle East had actually allowed, underneath, a very malignant . . . form of extremism to grow up."
We are giving away our security to countries who have not been our allies because they are less of a threat to us than Iran as "In those years, Saudi Arabia and Egypt were, at least, supportive of U.S. security objectives. Now Ms. Rice has made a point of saying that there will be no trade-off between the new arms sales and Saudi behavior in Iraq, even though Riyadh is all but openly working against U.S. interests there. The Saudis also have refused to cooperate with U.S. policy on Hamas or to commit to participating in an upcoming Middle East peace meeting. Egypt will get a 10-year renewal of the $1.3 billion a year in military aid it receives, even though both U.S. and Israeli officials say it has not made a serious effort to stop the smuggling of weapons from its territory to Hamas's army in Gaza.
Ms. Rice says "we are working with these states to give a chance to the forces of moderation and reform.
By unconditionally renewing military aid and sales to these regimes, the Bush administration would send them the message that reform is, in fact, unnecessary-that even cooperation in Iraq or Gaza is unnecessary-in order to remain a strategic U.S. ally. That won't make the United States look either strong or committed to a better future in the Middle East."

These morons make us look like the puniest 98 pound weakling ever. Thank you big bro 43!

The article "On to Containment" at
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20055323/site/newsweek/?nav=slate?from=rss

states "Compare and contrast. Here is a quote from Condoleezza Rice from
almost exactly a year ago, when the war in Lebanon between Hizbullah and Israel was raging. The secretary of State was then still in her 'birth pangs of a new Middle East' era, when she was condemning the U.S. approach to the Mideast from 'decades past' that simply accommodated the old Arab regimes. 'What you had in the Middle East before was American policies-bipartisan, by the way, it had been pursued by Democratic presidents and by Republican presidents-that engaged in so-called Middle East exceptionalism [in other words, democracy won't work with the Arabs] and was pursuing stability at the expense of democracy."

We are giving away all of this money and the benefactors don't even have to promise to act in our interests as "Rice and her undersecretary of State, Nicholas Burns, explicitly denied that there would be any conditions or 'quid pro quos' attached to this new aid."

Let's sum it up. "So, in the space of a year, the Bush team seems to have gone from condemning the decades-old U.S. policy of backing the Arab regimes to championing precisely that course....What's not as reasonable is the Bush administration's habit of repeatedly changing course while pledging to 'stay the course.'

The US and the Saudis are arming Iraqi Sunnis. Isn't that act diametrically opposed to the benchmark of disarming the militias?

The article "Ware: Surge Is Undermining The Very Government That America Created" at

click here

noted that the "On Anderson Cooper's show later in the evening, CNN Baghdad correspondent Michael Ware, who spoke live on a night scope camera while embedded with troops responded to 'the vice president's evaluation' of progress in Iraq, calling it 'sleight of hand.' 'Yeah, sectarian violence is down, but let's have a look at that,' said Ware. 'More than two million people have fled this country. 50,000 are still fleeing every month, according to the United Nations. So there's less people to be killed. And those who stay, increasingly are in ethnically-cleansed neighborhoods. They've been segregated.'

'There is still no sense of unity. And without America to act as the big baby sitter, this thing is not going to last.
Ware also responded to Brookings Institution analysts Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack's recent New York Times op-ed offering a sunny appraisal of progress in Iraq, calling the report 'very one dimensional.' 'It doesn't look at what's been done to achieve this and what long term sustainability there is,' said Ware. 'I mean, these guys unfortunately were only in the country for eight days.'
In order to achieve the small victories that O'Hanlon and Pollack cherry-picked for their column, America is actually undermining the Iraqi government, according to Ware. 'What America needs to come clean about is that it's achieving these successes by cutting deals, primarily, with its enemies,' he said.
'By achieving these successes, America is building Sunni militias,' said Ware.
'Yes, they're targeting al Qaeda, but these are also anti-government forces opposed to the very government that America created.'
Only "Mission Accomplished" W could accomplish having countries simultaneously 'With us' and 'against us'!

 

Rate It | View Ratings

winston Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Winston Smith is an ex-Social Worker. I worked in child welfare, and in medical settings and in homeless settings. In the later our facility was geared as a permanent address for people to apply for welfare. Once they received that we could send (more...)
 
Related Topic(s): ; , Add Tags
Group(s): , Add to My Group(s)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Bush planned the economic crisis for partisan GOP gain.

Why did we all hate Palin?

Why is Obama protecting 43?

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

What happens to US credibility if Spain finds them guilty and we don't?

Bush, with criminal intent, planned the economic crisis for partisan GOP gain.

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: