Panel May Have Few Good Options to Offer

Thursday in the Rose Garden with the Cabinet in-tow, President Bush said Iraq is a central front in the war on terror rather than the central front replay the tape. This looks as if Bush is trying to slip into the public record a major change in U.S. policy without any fanfare -- perhaps to prepare for or be consistent with what the Baker Study Group will recommend. Baker may have given the Bushies a heads-up. In any event, it wouldn’t surprise me if Bush now says he’s always thought that Iraq was not the central front even though that was his stated position pre-election. Many in the press and Bush supporters mercilessly jumped all over Sen. Kerry when he dropped one word from his attempt at a joke about Bush. Reporters should look critically at and question the Administration about Bush’s subtle attempt to shift policy on how important Iraq is suppose to be in the war post-election. We should not have to look-over this as just another excusable Bush blunder. By the way, Bush spoke from notes or prepared text in the Rose Garden while Kerry spoke off-the-cuff.

By ljpipes | Nov 11, 2006 10:51:09 PM | Request Removal

HOW AVOIDABLE THIS TRAJEDY COULD HAVE BEEN IF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAD EXERCISED SOME RESTRAINT AND INCLUDED OUR ALLIES IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS. THE HEAD OF HITLER’S PROPAGANDA, HERMAN GOERING SAID IT QUITE WELL AT THE NUREMBERG TRIAL: But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ... voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. ReichsMarschall Hermann Goering, the Nuremberg Diary one of the highest-ranking Nazis who survived to be captured and put on trial for war crimes. THIS PROPAGANDA CONTINUES IN THE PRESENT MISADMINISTRATION. DO NOT PROP A GANDER. BUSH SHOULD HAVE USED PROPER CANDOR!

By marceld | Nov 11, 2006 11:26:38 PM | Request Removal

So Baker is a pragmatist and realist who believes in Americas moral values, eh? That makes sense, since he has already tried to crookedly profit from the Iraq war. When he was presidential envoy for Iraqi debt relief, charged with persuading other countries to forgive the debts of the conquered Iraq, he offered his paid services to the Kuwaiti government to lobby for MAXIMUM enforcement of Iraqs debt to Kuwait. This was in direct contravention of his mission and Americas stated policy. He promised the Kuwaitis he would use his influence to recover $27 billion from the Iraqi treasury in return for a $1 billion cut. The business proposal was leaked to the Nation magazine. While it was extensively reported abroad, this story just disappeared in the US.

By Bud0 | Nov 12, 2006 12:05:15 AM | Request Removal

If anyone doubts that what I say above is true, google Guardian Baker Carlyle debt Kuwait.

By Bud0 | Nov 12, 2006 12:07:09 AM | Request Removal

It is ridiculous to think that Baker is going to find a silver bullet solution to this debacle he is a self-serving greedy political animal. It is a sign of our desperation that we are looking to him with such hope in our eyes. There are no good solutions. There are only awful solutions and terrible solutions. Small choice among rotten apples. Thanks a bunch, Sonny Boy. You have brought a great country, the USA, to its knees.

By pjwhite530 | Nov 12, 2006 2:07:33 AM | Request Removal

Truly, James A. Baker IIIs AE options.

By africanj60 | Nov 12, 2006 3:23:12 AM | Request Removal

IF THE US PULLS OUT IT WILL LOOSE CONTROL OF THE WORLDS SECOND LARGEST OIL RESERVES. THIS IS NOT VIETNAM.

By kuseldavid | Nov 12, 2006 5:24:28 AM | Request Removal

Yonkers, NY, 12 Nov 2006. If, as it appears, there is internal dissension within the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group on what to recommend as fundamental changes to the failed Iraq policy of President Bush, they should be reminded that pleasing Bush is not of paramount importance, nor is pleasing the victorious Democrats. Of paramount importance is the clear message of the American people--Democrats, Republicans, Independents and what have you--that they want a change in the Iraq policy which they say is a clear failure which impacts U.S. interests negatively. Mariano Patalinjug. MarPatalinjug@aol.com

By MarPatalinjug | Nov 12, 2006 5:31:28 AM | Request Removal

I believe it is an excellent opportunity for both the democrats as well as Mr. G. W. Bush to come up with a better solution to the issue of Iraq. In my view, it is high time for a meeting between the Sunnies and Chiites. Iraq is in serious problem and we know what religion can do in politics i.e. Palestinians and Jews. If the U.S. is able to meet with these two religious groups and come up with some agreement between these two antagonistic religious forces, the country may gain some stability. I believe part of the solution is within reach if there is a true commitment to peace in the Middle East. Azucena Fillo Haro

By afharo12 | Nov 12, 2006 5:41:17 AM | Request Removal

What a waste of time this panel is. Such groups invariably are made up of the usual bureaucratic suspects, who have a vested interest in the status quo. The Bushies obviously intend to stall, stall and stall, and pass the Iraq problem on to the next president. Then those most responsible for this debacle will simply tiptoe away into comfortable retirement and write their memoirs.

By aamurphy2 | Nov 12, 2006 6:23:12 AM | Request Removal

Here is what America voted for: Withdraw funding for the troops. We want out of Iraq, not 8 years from now but today. Since King George is not going to do anything but kill out fighting men and women, the only path to retreat is WITHDRAW THE FUNDING. Further, we should withdraw our troops from Europe, in fact we should withdraw our troops from the rest of the world. It is time for us to stop trying to run the world and come home. The voters have spoken, the government should listen.

By kl305 | Nov 12, 2006 7:12:16 AM | Request Removal

After Iraq, whatever else happens, I think it will be high time to reexamine the advantages of isolationism! This is what our founding fathers told us to do. Avoid foreign entanglements. I basically agree with kl305. If we try to be international do-gooders, we will earn only resentment, not gratitude. Nobody hates Switzerland, and Switzerland has no security problems. Let us meditate on that, please. No one can blame Switzerland for any of the worlds serious problems. If you do not get involved, then it does not become your problem.

By Tim_G | Nov 12, 2006 7:53:20 AM | Request Removal

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Panel May Alter Policy on Iraq So reads the front page headline. Is the panel now the decider?

By branfo4 | Nov 12, 2006 7:59:15 AM | Request Removal

The US needs to re-think the whole of its foreign policy. The Middle-East will never be stable while the US continues to support the terrorist state of Israel. Get out of Israel and let them stand on thier own two feet. Let Israel negotiate with thier neighbors. Maybe then they will stop their terrorist activities. Maybe then will the World have a better opinion of the US.

By perez | Nov 12, 2006 8:00:26 AM | Request Removal

Just as Americans suffered the humiliation of Vietnam and the Russians were drained by Afghanistan, we come full circle! We create a problem and then are totally incapable of solving it! The Democrats were largely percieved as getting the US stuck in the Vietnam cess pool, at the end bailed out with Republican Foreign Policy expertise ....... So now the Republicans have gotten caught in the shifting endless sands of the Mid East, picking the wrong opponent in the region, thus forcing a rescue by the gloating, power hungry Democrats! The sad part of the whole thing, is that we keep repeating these costly self inflicted scenarios, over and over..........ad finitum, not heeding one bit, the previous lessons, the history of our repetative frustrations!

By Bexarpaw | Nov 12, 2006 8:45:07 AM | Request Removal

I am very disappointed with this article and most others that I have read in our nations newspapers. I have lived for many years in the Middle East and I can see no solution to the Iraqi situation other than the current one, difficult as it may seem. For instance, if you divide up Iraq into the three spheres suggested by many, you will alienate our regional partners and most assuredley allow on segment to be used by Al Queda and other terrorist groups. Rapid withdrawal of coalition forces, no matter how it is done, will result in greater sectarian violence and lead to a Shiite dominated state which will be the worst nightmare imaginable for Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel - all our allies. The winners in a withdrawal policy before the Iraqis are able to see to their own security will be Syria, Jordan, Iran, and, sadly, the Wahabi and Shiite extremists. And the US will be viewed as a paper tiger by all who wish us harm.

By andy.finlayson | Nov 12, 2006 9:21:03 AM | Request Removal

The Baker commission is a waste of time. We need to conduct a real crusade to conquer and install a sovereign government in the oil rich area of Iraq, then we should install a population and government thats in line with Americas interest. This also will allow the US military to identify the enemy and use our tactical advantage agianst nations not groups of isurgents IRAN. The view from a retired enlist member who been there and done that.

By fieldmice | Nov 12, 2006 9:52:42 AM | Request Removal

BexarpawPower hungry Democrats? A classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.Only elevated to the max.K1305I agree 100.

By nanturner | Nov 12, 2006 11:27:12 AM | Request Removal

The Independent in editorial comment brought the most basic facts to highlight. 1. The breakup of the country into Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish blocs looks increasingly unavoidable. 2. The national government of Nouri al-Maliki is weak and lacks popular legitimacy. 3. Ethnic cleansing on the ground is well advanced and proceeding at an increasing pace. 4. US and British troops are doing nothing to prevent this and are effectively powerless in stopping the sectarian killing. 5. The Iraqi national police and army are too feeble or compromised by the infiltration of sectarian militias to perform security duties. 6. The north of the country, Kurdistan, is relatively peaceful because it is already independent in all but name, with a separate army and economy. If these points are accurate, then this is a recipe for lengthy civil war and is a no-win situation for the US and Britain. The situation will continue to crumble and more soldiers will die. Billions more will be wasted. So if we stay the fiasco will continue to atomize at great cost in blood and treasure. If we leave, Iraq will undergo a cataclysm. My conclusion: leave now and mitigate the blowback in honest cooperation with Iran and Syria. It is the best we can do. Thank you, all you neocon and zionist theorists.

By tarquinwalton | Nov 12, 2006 12:32:35 PM | Request Removal

Some predictions on the Iraq Study Groups report and the reaction that will follow its release: The report will displease everyone because it will be a stay-the-course-lite report. It will accomplish nothing because there is nothing to be accomplished in Iraq. This is because no one in public life dares to tell the truth: that Iraq is irretrievably lost and there is nothing that can be done to alter that fact. What will happen in Iraq, sooner or later, is that Iraq will collapse totally and then the U.S. will withdraw, leaving the country as a raging black hole on the face of the earth. The U.S. will then try to build a firewall around it, without much success. The sooner we in the U.S. face up to this impending disaster the better chance well have of dealing rationally with the radioactive residue of this misconceived adventure.

By norriehoyt | Nov 12, 2006 12:34:26 PM | Request Removal