With Tony Blair by his side, the president was careful on Thursday to laud the Iraq Study Group’s report, but maintain his stance on troop withdrawals and diplomacy. In particular, Bush said he would not compromise on preconditions for talks with Syria and Iran.
New York Times:
WASHINGTON, Dec. 7—President Bush moved quickly on Thursday to distance himself from the central recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group: pulling back all combat brigades over the next 15 months and direct talks with Iran and Syria.
One day after the independent panel rocked Washington with its bleak assessment of conditions in Iraq, Mr. Bush met at the White House with his closest ally in the war, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain. The president said afterward that the United States needs “a new approach” in Iraq and that he would ‘’seriously consider” the report, but was unlikely to accept all of its recommendations.
At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, the co-chairmen of the panel, James A. Baker III and Lee H. Hamilton, called on Congress to exert pressure on Mr. Bush to accept the report in its entirety. Mr. Baker told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the White House should not treat the report “like a fruit salad,” while Mr. Hamilton complained that Congress had been ‘’extremely timid” in overseeing the war.
But Mr. Bush, in his first extended comments on the study, pushed back. With Mr. Blair by his side, the president said he needed to be “flexible and realistic” in considering troop movements, and made clear he would impose preconditions for talking to Iran and Syria that neither side is willing to accept. He was especially animated in describing what he said would be the consequences of a failure to stabilize Iraq, saying that future generations of Americans would be put at risk.
Link
Email Newsletter
Get truth delivered to your inbox every week.
Previous item: Playboy on Trial in Indonesia
Next item: How to Beat Wal-Mart
By RS Janes, December 9, 2006 at 4:27 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
You have a good point, Mr. Smoliar, Bush does operate from his ‘faith’ when he’s not deciding from his ‘gut.’ It’s just a shame that he doesn’t envision a God with an ironic sense of humor and rely less on his digestive system.
Ms. Kjellberg also pointed out that Bush, in his press conference with Prime Minister Poodle, acknowledged “It’s bad” in Iraq. He also followd that by on of his patented inappropriate snickers.
Mr. Praise to Allah, I understand you might have problems following any debate that’s not in ALL CAPS, but think about your statement for a moment—if the anti-liberal Arabs wipe us out, won’t they then come for you? And if you think eliminating liberals from the face of the earth will bring peace, just look at who you’re blaming for the wars—anti-liberal people.
Recognizing glaring logical contradictions within your own words probably is not your forte, is it, Mr. PTA?
Report thisBy Eleanore Kjellberg, December 8, 2006 at 3:09 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
“he seeks answers in his own heart, disregarding the possibility that they may be found elsewhere”
Stephen,
Report thisBush has real “heart” he’s sitting on it!
By Stephen Smoliar, December 8, 2006 at 8:07 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
RS Janes (#41260) hit most of the right nails on the head but forgot the most important nail of all: the nail of faith (best analyzed recently in THE NEW YORK REVIEW by Gary Wills). I have been agonizing over questions of rationale ever since Bush responded to the “denial” challenge by a BBC reporter, forgetting, as I often do, that rationale is not in the playbook. To put things in Janes’ terms, Bush does not particularly care whether or not the Iraq Study Group is a CYA report because the only thing that can cover HIS ass is his God (or at least his faith in that God). Thus, if he plays chess at all (which is unlikely), we can expect that he makes all of his moves from his heart, regardless of how much we have learned about the logic behind the game, let alone the lessons the today’s masters have learned by the historical study of the games of past masters (with apologies for the think schmear of metaphor over this sentence). The result, then, is that, when Bush ponders questions of the “honor” of the United States (and, in due fairness, I believe that he DOES ponder those questions), he seeks answers in his own heart, disregarding the possibility that they may be found elsewhere.
Report thisBy Jackie T. Gabel, December 8, 2006 at 1:43 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Seeing these two glaring so confidently at one another, “knowingly” is more prescient, as though they both know something nobody else in the room presumably does like maybe another big black-ops/psy-ops is coming down the pike to serve up a pretext to launch on Iran or maybe Korea; Venezuela anyone?
For anyone out there still confused about the dubious makeup of the Iraq Study Group or Gates nomination for Secretary of Defense (?!?!) why not? Convicted felon Elliott Abrams has been back for some time now. The shadow is government coming out of the woodwork the same old hands we saw in Iran Contra and those who ran the Mano Blanco networks (e.g. Negroponte) throughout Latin America. No wonder death squads are running amok in Iraq.
The desperation is palatable. Let’s hope they don’t loose it completely and call in a hit on the USS Enterprise from a Delta team working inside Iran to serve up the pretext to “glass it over” as the war monger rabble called out for Afghanistan after 9/11. With madmen like these caressing the triggers, anything’s possible support 911Truth, bring them all to trial!
Report thisBy Praise To Allah, December 7, 2006 at 8:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I AM SICK OF THESE ANTI-AMERICAN LIBERAL JERKS ON THIS FORUM AND THIS TRUTHDIG SITE IN GENERAL.
Report thisI HOPE THESE ANTI-LIBERAL ARABS FINALLY WIPE YOU OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH !
THEN THERE WILL BE PEACE IN THE WORLD !
GLORY BE !
By Quy Tran, December 7, 2006 at 6:31 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The poodle meets with his master to discuss how to bark loudly !
Just stay away from them if not you would be seriously bitten.
Report thisBy Grant Gerver, December 7, 2006 at 5:59 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yeah, he’s “The Decider” all right. That absolutely does it for me: I’ll never vote for Bush a third time.
http://www.seriouskidding.com
Report thisBy Eleanore Kjellberg, December 7, 2006 at 5:10 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush did reach an insightful conclusion about Iraq, when he was questioned by an English reporter today--"IT’S BAD!” DUH!
Report thisBy RS Janes, December 7, 2006 at 4:52 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s perversely amusing to watch Bush provided with a CYA report from this Iraq Study Group and refuse to use it to cover his behind. Perhaps if Daddy’s friend Jim Baker hadn’t headed up the panel it would be easier for Oedipus Rex to accept the recommendations of the ISG.
Watching Bush trying to talk his way out of this monumental failure is something like watching a chess game where the king has only one move to force a stalemate and all others lead to checkmate—and the player won’t take it. Of course, the tragedy here is that the pawns are real human beings bleeding real blood, something the ISG report, in what I’ve read so far, doesn’t bother to address: How many Americans and Iraqis have to die so that Bush can save face?
Everyone with any brains around the world and here at home already knows we’ve lost and we’re going to have to leave or be forced out. Trying to shore up Bush’s reputation or any concept of America’s ‘honor’ that he’s so resolutely discredited the past six years is ludicrous.
Report thisBy Mike, December 7, 2006 at 4:45 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
How do you admit to the American people that this IRAQ war is a war for their oil. It was never in our plan that we would have to leave. Now, the pressure keeps mounting on Mr. Bush, and one day he will need to speak the truth. He will breakdown and tell America the truth. But no, wait, better not, the world might not understand. The whole universe could come tumbling down on him. Hope he hasn’t painted himself into a corner! I think I’m starting to see why he is so damn stubborn. He’s in a kind of a pickle. He should just take a long, long vacation, Don’t even tell anyone where he’s going. You know, kinda like the military where they let you be absent for a little while until things die down a bit. I don’t think you even have to ask for the leave time. There’s a name for it “AOLW” or something? Never know, just might work!
Report thisBy Stephen Smoliar, December 7, 2006 at 3:53 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
It should not be any surprise that the NEW YORK TIMES lacks the backbone of either the BBC (whose reporter asked Bush if he was in denial) or the FINANCIAL TIMES, first out the the RSS gate to report the press conference and including both the question and Bush’s excuse for an answer (Its bad in Iraq. [very long pause] That help? I put up a brief account with pointers on my own blog at:
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-Mff23hgidqmHGqbcv.lfska kEtS6qLVHUEMFUG4-?cq=1&p=213
Report this