« Hard Left Kos Argues Against Bush Impeachment? | Main | University Of Chicago Study: Cart Goes Before Horse - Newspapers Bias Blamed On Subscribers »
December 8, 2006
FAQ's About The Irag Study Group's Report
Topics: IraqIf you were waiting with bated breath for the Baker-Hamilton-Chamberlain Commission report, anticipating rational and reasonable recommendations that have a remote possibility of affecting positive change in Iraq and the ME region, you have by now come to realize that you were sadly mistaken (they actually believe that Islamo-Nazis in Iraq will be pacified if Israel hands the Golan Heights over to Syria and that singing kumbaya with Iran will bring peace to Iraq and the ME region). No doubt such realization has left you not only shaking your head in amazement at their naiveté but also searching for answers, especially since talks with Iran and Syria make about as much sense as Neville Chamberlain's discussions with Hitler).
Fortunately for what is certainly got to be a large number of bated breathers, Dean Barrett has a list of FAQs to help you wade through the insanities of the BHCC (Iraq Study Group - funny thing, they actually never left the Green Zone, so no one's very clear on what the hell they actually studied in Iraq) report. Here's a couple of Dean's FAQs to get started on:
1) I don't really understand why and how the Baker Commission came into being in the first place. Was it some sort of political Immaculate Conception that brought this turgid collection of dinosaurs together, or does anyone actually bear responsibility for this sham?Read more at Hugh Hewitt...Something called the United States Institute for Peace formed the Iraq Study Group after being prodded to do so by "interested members of Congress." The White House welcomed its development and pledged to cooperate with it, but what actually happened behind the scenes is anybody's guess.
2) That's a little weird, isn't it? An Institute for Peace formed a Commission whose ostensible purpose was to tell us how to fight a war?
It's downright Orwellian. But the "Peace" in the Institute's title did serve to tip the Commission's hand. Here they were, purportedly trying to figure out how to fight a war, and none of the commission members had any significant military experience. What's more, the expertise of people who actually know a thing or two about fighting insurgencies, both academics and soldiers, was not called upon.
3) But the Commission did go to Iraq. You got to give them props for that.
They never left the Green Zone. Since they never left the Green Zone, they have no first hand knowledge of what it's like out in the s**t. Not that that's a hanging offense. All I'm saying is that the trip to the Green Zone was a P.R. stunt. Whatever knowledge the Study Group members acquired by going to Iraq, they could have more easily and efficiently gathered via conference call.
Thanking God for small favors, it appears that President Bush is distancing himself from the central recommendations of the ISG report, choosing to reject two of its most fundamental recommendations: pulling back American combat brigades from Iraq over the next 15 months, and engaging in direct talks with Iran and Syria.
I see this as a sound decision, however, the issue of what to do next remains a mystery. A good beginning would be to tell Iran and Syria that they can avoid being turned into a rather large parking lot by immediately halting their support of the violence in Iraq, and withdraw their support of terrorists throughout the world. Our next step, of course, would be to selectively begin carrying out the threat, then ratcheting up the pressure in quick succession.
On the other hand, no one's asked for my advice and I doubt our political leaders, particularly the newly-elected Democratic leadership, are willing to take the bold steps necessary to actually defeat the radical Islamists that have us in their sites for civilization-change.
Related: Mark R. Taylor, writing at Family Security Matters, has a couple of questions of his own: The Second Question is - Will The Death Be Yours or Theirs?
My first question regarding the Iraq Study Group (ISG) is this: what expertise do James A. Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger, Vernon Jordon, Sandra Day O'Conner, Edwin Meese, Leon Panetta, William J. Perry, Charles S. Robb and Alan K. Simpson bring to the discussion of, indeed the solution to, the War on Terror?Read it all ...Nowhere in this war committee is anyone with wartime experience in Iraq. No general, no sergeant, no contractor, no one with any experience fighting Islamic Fascism at all. Therefore, the Iraq Study Group Report should be taken for what it is - a book about the solution to a complex and intractable war written not by military strategists and accomplished, battle-hardened professionals but by a handful of retired judges, politicians and bureaucrats.
To illustrate the ISG's ignorance of the Islamofascist threat in the Middle East, one needs only to read page 15 of the ISG book where it is stated that America should turn to Iran and Syria to "engage them constructively".
Excuse me? Did they not read or comprehend the letters from Iran's President to the American people written November 2006 calling for all to bow down to Allah or die? Have they not watched him on Iranian television calling for the death and destruction of the American people? What makes them think they can negotiate with a fanatical, aspiring dictator whose beliefs are anchored in centuries of Islamic fundamentalist dogma?
The legendary Southern philosophical philosopher, Jerry Clower, once said, "It is obvious that these folks are educated way beyond their intelligence." Mr. Clower's observations are certainly applicable in this case.
It is clear that our Iraq Study Group has no understanding of the enemy we fight. They fail to grasp that any sign of wavering is a sign of weakness. That Iran, Syria, Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and a long list of our enemies are secretly cheering at their gullibility and naiveté. As pawns in a chess game, the Iraq Study Group has accomplished one thing: a 160 page document claiming defeat. A "cut and run"strategy. Give the Iraqis "one more chance" to secure their country or we pack up and go home.
Other coverage: Captain Ed observes that the report seemed to fare much better inside the Beltway, but it turns out that even there people question the report's policy recommendations.
Posted by Richard at December 8, 2006 11:53 AM
Articles Related to Iraq:
- FAQ's About The Irag Study Group's Report - Dec 08, 2006
