Pelosi Plays Peace Broker

[Dr. Shane]

Pelosi plays peace broker in Middle East

Quote:

Ms Pelosi's visit to Damascus is the latest sign of Democratic assertiveness in foreign policy, following votes in the House and the Senate setting out a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, in defiance of a veto threat from the White House.

The House speaker, the third highest ranked elected official in the US, behind the president and the vice-president, is the most senior American politician to visit Syria since relations between the countries went into deep freeze in 2003.

I have a mixed reaction to this story. I don't see a problem with the Speaker of the House meeting with foreign heads of state. If she can accomplish something that would be great.

I am suspicious that her visit is just a political stunt in the power struggle between the Democrats and Republicans. If that is the case, she should be shunned and shamed. Using our nation's enemies for political purposes is not commendable behavior.

[olger]

She should go home and do something useful, like bake cookies.

oG

[bevin]

I am incredibly amused that Bush makes a big deal out of the leader of the House Democrats going, but is completely silent when a few weeks earlier some Republican Senators went.

Mr Bush has zero, zip, nada, credibility left.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Well, in perspective, Bush didn't bring it up. A reporter asked him the question and he just answered it. I was listening to the press conference at the time. I was actually surprised when I later saw that his answer made a headline. So I think it is the media that is making a big deal out of it moreso than the White House.

[Jeannieb43]

I am incredibly amused that Bush makes a big deal out of the leader of the House Democrats going, but is completely silent when a few weeks earlier some Republican Senators went.

Mr Bush has zero, zip, nada, credibility left.

/Bevin

Dubya, unfortunately, has a knack for not doing the right thing at the right time.

[Neil D]

Quote:

Dubya, unfortunately, has a knack for not doing the right thing at the right time.

Wonder what happened to the master of PR, Karl Rove???? :duno

[Woody]

She should go home and do something useful, like bake cookies.

oG

Okay Olger ... stop bringing up Hillary.

[lazarus]

This is all good politics by Pelosi.

Anything that contrasts the action of the Dems with the GOP is good long term. Its clear that Bush foreign policy is in a shambles and Pelosi cannot lose. The dems are doing the right thing. They need to be strong, forthright and unafraid of neo-CON rhetoric.

This whole political scene is incredible. Nearly everything Bush does and says these days seems to be further evidence of this admin's hypocrisy or ineffectiveness. I suppose this is reaping time!

[Dr. Shane]

If Pelosi's motives were to do some good, than it is totally acceptable. If it is a stunt in the power struggle between the Democrats and the Republicans, as Lazarus suggests, she should be shunned and shamed.

This is the logic. She is an American and as an American she should have the best interests of America at heart. She should be more concerned about the best interests of America than the amount of political power her own political party has. Do we all agree about that?

Would it be wrong for Pelosi do something that harms her country in order to gain more political power?

Most do not believe the war against terror is going well. Most do not believe Bush is doing a good job. However 57% of Americans want to win the war and 53% believe it is still possible. AMERICA SAYS LET'S WIN WAR

Quote:

Only 25 percent of those surveyed agreed with the statement, "I don't really care what happens in Iraq after the U.S. leaves, I just want the troops brought home." Seventy-four percent disagreed...

But by 53 percent to 46 percent, Americans said Democrats are going too far, too fast in demanding troop withdrawals.

However in this little rant of mine, I am not concluding Pelosi did anything wrong. If she went over there with hopes of getting Syria to cooperate with us and slow down the flow of foreign insurgents into Iraq, that would be a good thing. And that is what she is claiming.

[lazarus]

* The most popular option (32 percent) was a withdrawal timetable.

I guess u didn't see this one. Thats the dems position!

[Dr. Shane]

32% is far from a majority. If the US just pulls out of Iraq, the terrorists follow us home. This isn't like Vietnaum where we can just pull out and let dictators murder millions of their own people. This is a global conflict. Do those 32% think that when we leave the terrorists are going to say thank you and become our friends?

Defeat in Iraq is not in America's interest. This is highlighted by the fact that Pelosi claims to be trying to help the effort by getting Syria to help stop the influx of foreign insurgents.

The majority of Americans want the US to win and believe the US can win. Anyone trying to undermine the war effort is not working in America's best interest.

It is fair for Pelosi or anyone else to criticize Bush and the way he has executed the war. If Pelosi thinks she can do better, as it seems she does, that is great. As long as her goal is to win the war and not just gain more political power at the expense of the nation, she is doing a good thing.

[olger]

Originally Posted By: olger

She should go home and do something useful, like bake cookies.

oG

Okay Olger ... stop bringing up Hillary.

Did I get confused? Sorry `bout that. As a concession, you may have all the cookies.

This is OLGER signing off..

[Jeannieb43]

There's no "winning" or "losing" in this fight. We don't have an enemy, per se. We're just in there trying to impose our form of "order" on the Iraqis. Might as well talk to the wind; it'll never happen.

And our poor boys are giving their lives and limbs for a lost cause.

[bevin]

Quote:

If the US just pulls out of Iraq, the terrorists follow us home.

This is just the Bush Administration's version of the Domino Theory that was used to justify VietNam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_Theory

They were wrong then, and Bush is wrong now. Actually the war in Iraq, it turns out, has made it MORE LIKELY that we will be attacked.

Quote:

This isn't like Vietnaum where we can just pull out and let dictators murder millions of their own people.

Do you have any evidence this happened in VietNam?

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Just in case anyone missed it.

I guess that was one of the dominos in the theory. The 2006 transatlantic aircraft plot was another domino. The Madrid Bombings another domino. The London subway bombing, another domino. The USS Cole, another domino. The African Embassy bombings, another domino.

How many dominos do we need for the theory to be wrong?

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Do you have any evidence this happened in VietNam?

It was all part of our policy in SE Asia. Congress suspended aid to Cambodia in 1973. This gave the Khmer Rouge the upper hand in the country. In 1975 the Lon Nol government ran out of ammunition and the Khmer Rouge captured Phnom Penh. The Khmer Rouge then killed between 1.7 and 3 million Cambodians.

This same type of blood bath can be expect if we pull out of Iraq before its new government is ready. Then the terrorists take control and gain Iraq's oil wealth. Then the dominos really start falling - just like the twin towers.

[bevin]

The dominos for Vietnam were Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia.

Yes, there was a blood-bath - but it was NOT in Vietnam.

Our loosing VietNam was not what caused that, and it was the Vietnamese, not the Americans, who stopped it. It was the war itself - which Barbara Tuchman has rightly described as a folly by both us AND by the Vietnamese.

The gradual pull out from Vietnam did not keep the corrupt government we had propped up from falling...

Similar events to the ones you name are not going to be solved by making more enemies in Iraq - or in Iran.

The trick in Iraq now is to try to salvage ANYTHING out of Bush's Blunder - there never was a "win" here - now we are trying to minimise the damage.

Bush is clinging to the fallacy that there is a win here. Actually he is running out the clock so he can blame his successor for failing to solve an insoluable problem.

I agree that an immediate and rapid pull out may result in one of a range of possibilities we don't like - but so does staying there. That is why it was such a huge blunder - Bush was told in advance that his argument for the war was wrong, told in advance what would happen, and did it anyway.

/Bevin

[Bravus]

There is no path from here that leads to good results... which is why it was horrible planning to end up here. The best that can be achieved from here is more and less awful results. It is possible for sincere, thoughtful people to disagree about which approach will lead to the least awful results, and for whom.

[Dr. Shane]

The communist domino theory was flawed but there was no way for us to know that in the 1950s and 60s. We now look back with hindsight, which is 20/20.

The suspension of US aid to Cambodia was very much a result of what was going on with the Vietnam War and domestically in the US at the time. One cannot separate America's policy in Vietnam from that with neighboring Cambodia and maintain any kind of historical credibility. We lost Vietnam because we gave up and when we gave up we quit giving aid to Cambodia.

Iraq's future all depends on its new government and the US supporting it. Winning in Iraq means now what it has always meant. It means the government can stand on its own without US troops protecting it.