Bush Admin = Irrational

“I remember some of my old poli. sci. professors in college expressing the idea that most political actors make rational decisions.

A decision might be crude, immoral, illegal and ineffective, but there are almost always rational reasons for the decision.

And even though I have disagreed with Bush strongly over the years, I have found most of his decisions to be at least rational.

I am beginning to question this.

#1: The plan that he introduced this week seems to lack any basis in reality. And it seems to lack even a cursory attempt to consult Congress or the American people.

#2: The Pentagon is now trying to blacklist lawyers and law firms who defend Gitmo prisoners. They are pressuring administration-friendly corporations to drop business with these firms.

#3: At a time when almost all of the president's initiatives are in difficulty, the administration made a conscious decision to tread on the concept of diplomatic immunity and, potentially, Iran's sovereignty.

It appears to me that the White House has a siege mentality. They are panicked. And it doesn't seem to me that they are completely rational anymore.

I don't know why, but Bush seems more like an Act V MacBeth every day.”

“Not good.

Keep Junior away from 'the football.'”

“Cue Randy Newman... "Political Science."”

“we'll save Australia, don't want to hurt no Kangaroos...”

“Nothing is irresponsible or irrational about being an elected god whose purpose is to solve all human problems.”

““Nothing is irresponsible or irrational about being an elected god whose purpose is to solve all human problems.”
salebored

Cool, ya think I could get him to fix my well? It's frozen and we have no water.

Perhaps they could send Cheney, it's not like he's doing anything right now.”

“I was told he's hunting, but without mishap he'll be on his way. I was just told that global warming's just turned the corner and will soon arrive.
last edited: 1/13/07 11:52:39 AM”

“Mt., to avoid future dehyration, fly a 'GWB' flag on that well. believers in global warming get special dividends.”

“I think this is still the invisible hand of Dick Cheney. The man doesn't seem capable of learning from past mistakes. I wonder if his health has effected his judgement. How ironic is it that he was chosen to shore up Bush's inexperience? We were told that we'd have a steady hand at the helm.”

“The good ship USA is is guided like a canoe. When the left side is in power the left paddles guide the ship into the right shore and......the right into”

“Heres a nice tune for the shrub's



take all your overgrown infants away somewhere and build them a home a little place of their own
the fletcher memorial home for incurable tyrants and kings
and they can appear to themselves every day
on closed circuit t.v.
to make sure they're still real
it's the only connection they feel
"ladies and gentlemen, please welcome reagan and haig
mr. begin and friend mrs. thatcher and paisley
mr. brezhnev and party
the ghost of mccarthy
the memories of nixon
and now adding colour a group of anonymous latin
american meat packing glitterati"
did they expect us to treat them with any respect
they can polish their medals and sharpen their
smiles, and amuse themselves playing games for a while
boom boom, bang bang, lie down you're dead
safe in the permanent gaze of a cold glass eye
with their favourite toys
they'll be good girls and boys
in the fletcher memorial home for colonial
wasters of life and limb
is everyone in?
are you having a nice time?
now the final solution can be applied”

“Darn that Bush the Boogeyman! Does this man never stop with the insanity? OK, here's what ya do...

”

“We should consider the Democrat's plan.


As soon as they have one.”

“Yup. The Republicans just can't wait for the Democrat Party plan.

They've been waiting for years.

It's like a drunk man looking for a beer. They can slam back and forget their troubles for a bit.

Well, they can keep waiting. It ain't coming to save their sorry ass.

When the opposition self-destructs, just stay the hell out of the way.

Conservatism=Permanent Majority!”

“We should consider the Democrat's plan.


Critism is the only plan they've had for the last 6 years. Expect more of the same mixed with mild to moderate screwing of the economy.
last edited: 1/13/07 9:29:30 PM”

“THERE IS NO PLAN FOR IRAQ

Anyone who thinks that there is legitimate hope for our involvement in Iraq, absent a dramatic and/or long term commitment to increase troop levels, is delusional.

So why pull something out of your ass just for the sake of making something up?

And this administration has refused any true consultation with Congress, let alone with the Democrat Party.

In the past several days, Bush has made the statement that he DOES NOT NEED Congressional consultation to implement his plan.

So, why on earth would anyone just make up a plan that has ZERO chance of consideration?

After all, we've seen what happens when a close Bush family friend like Baker tries to formulate a plan.

It would be the political equivalent of a "Kick-Me" sign.

Personally, I support a status quo position - absent a dramatic troop increase. Things might continue to deteriorate. But they will deteriorate less quickly than if we leave.

And we need to prepare ourselves for increasing and regular death for the forseeable future.”

“BTW, the first presidential debates have been scheduled for April 4 and 5 of 2007.

One will be for the Democrat Party and one will be for the Bush Party.

Thank God! The sooner we crank this baby up, the sooner we can make Mr. Irrelevant an official lame duck.”

“RL, Why wouldn't the Democrats come up with a plan? Because the Bush plan is working obviously. No more terrorist attacks in the US. I know it is hard to admit, but that was the objective.”

“I thought we went there to get the WMDs... errr... establish a democracy in the heart of the Middle East... errr...


Yeah, working out great.”

“And we need to prepare ourselves for increasing and regular death for the forseeable future.
reformed lurker

And how many American lives are you planning to sacrifice?
What purpose will their deaths serve?”

“Bacpac, the cost was too high. One trillion dollars. 3,000 troops dead currently and probably 10,000 or 20,000 once we're done.

And I would submit that most of the safety against terrorism has come from good police work and a general awareness about terrorism that wasn't present prior to 911.

We have given up our rights to due process and privacy and we have lost our stellar reputation abroad.

I would also suggest that a terrorist attack at this point would be counterproductive to the terrorists. Nothing would bail Bush out of his mess right now easier than another domestic terrorist attack.

Also, while there has not been a large scale terrorist attack within the United States since 911, there have been small attacks that have resulted in a handful of individual deaths and several dozen injuries. We also had a major anthrax attack that killed people.

In addition, we have had and continue to have regular and large scale terrorist attacks against American targets abroad. Greece is the latest example.

Also, we have 7 attacks PER HOUR against United States forces within Iraq.

So if you mean "not working" when you suggest that the Bush plan is "working," then I am in complete agreement.
last edited: 1/14/07 9:22:49 AM”

“Lumberjack,

They will prevent even more large scale death.

I believe that keeping the war localized to Iraq is enough of a war aim to keep the troops there.

Once you get Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia directly involved absent a U.S. force, there is potential for death on the scale of Cambodia, Rwanda and WWII.

10,000 or 20,000 American deaths are not too much of a price to pay to keep that from happening.

You are welcome to have a different opinion.”

“BTW, I know that sounds a bit crass, but that's the world we live in.

Carmakers have beancounters on staff who determine the numbers of people who are likely to die given a particular seatbelt design or body structure.

They have to find a happy medium between the IDEAL - nobody dies - and the PRACTICAL - no one will buy a $200,000 car that has every safety feature known to man.

Those are the types of decisions that get made in the real world.

So, my idealistic side says "Bring the troops home." I don't want anyone to die. But my practical side tells me that if we leave, more will die.

Deal with reality.”

“Civil war in Iraq will happen. I just dont see how putting our people in the middle of the crossfire helps. If the Iraqi's want to wipe each other out I relly dont see that it is our problem. Our role in Iraq should be limited to advice and humanitarian aid at this point. The Iraqi's must be allowed to run their own affairs even if we disagree with it.


Oh and so far as Im concerned - better a million Iraqi's then a single american...
last edited: 1/14/07 10:39:02 AM”

“I've got no problem with that view.

But I think that there is more at stake here than just Iraq.

I think that deciding to mediate the conflict between the Iraqi Sunnis and Iraqi Shiites is a completely separate issue from deciding whether to provide border security for Iraq.

I could see an option in which the U.S. redeploys to the border regions, oil fields and desert areas. It would be a tripwire against foreign involvement and give us some bases to bomb any terrorist training camps that arise within the borders of Iraq.

Maybe the civil war and ethnic cleansing are inevitable. And maybe we'll end up with some cohesive population centers afterwards. But, I hope it doesn't take a million dead Iraqis to make that happen.”

“I disagree. We would have far better french bread had the french had forces on the Mason-Dixon back in our civil war.”

“Iraq has a lot of border and we just dont have the troops to patrol it all. Border patrol does seem to be a better choice then Bush's plan.

Freedom has to be bought by Iraqi blood. It just may take a million to quench their lust for war and bring all sides to the table. There is nothing we can do to change this except perhaps through mediation.”

“Anything we do in the middle east to help or harm is still done wearing an oil dependent crown of thorns. The easy money that has fallen so quickly into the hands of so few members of this recently medieval world continues to allow extreme behaviors that can not be controlled, especially by our country in which the same concentration of wealth is occuring.”

“RL, So good police work is all we need to combat terrorism. That is pretty idealistic isn't it. Even though Democrats complained about every aspect of the war on terror the sane ones have to admit it has been effective in preventing further attacks.”

“Bacpac,

Good police work is certainly not "all we need" to combat terrorism. I never said that.

And I have zero problem with the war in Afghanistan. And I am fully in support of the actions in Somalia. I think we need more troops in Iraq.

We do not have indigenous Muslim terrorists. They come from outside the country. So, most of what will protect us from terrorism is keeping track of who enters and leaves the country, monitoring cargo and developing good intelligence.

I think that we've been pretty good at that. But I'm not convinced that al qaeda is trying to attack US soil at this point.

Iraq was a lousy failure in terms of the war on terrorism. It wasn't directly involved in terrorism until after the invasion. And it took away massive resources that could have been applied to the effort.

I think that we are actually in more danger today than we were on 911. And I think that the decisions of this president and his party have much to do with that.”

“We can't or won't control our own borders, I don't think it's realistic to expect to be able to control Iraq's borders.”

“(ain't that the truth)”

“Ya know with all these new diseases and syndromes they keep coming up with these days I can't believe no one has come up with one for the Bush haters. AntiChrist Syndrome or something. BoogeyMan-itis maybe. i don't think there's a pill for self righteousness and self importance though. LOL!”

“Liberals are the ones who come up with syndroms and diseases to excuse bad behavior. They don't consider Bush hating or religion bashing bad behavior.
last edited: 1/15/07 8:32:55 AM”

“On the same low level as Restless Leg Syndrome then? Restless Conscience Syndrome?”

“ya know, i was just thinking that we needed one more thread about bushiraq, complete with vast overgeneralizations from the left and the right. thank god rl stepped up to fill that void”

“"We should consider the Democrat's plan.


As soon as they have one"


If the Republican plan worked in the first place, there would be no need for this consideration.”

“"I promise you ...I never had sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinski."”

“On Iraq, U.S. Turns to Onetime Dissenters

By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 14, 2007; A01

First of an occasional series

Snippets:

Timothy M. Carney went to Baghdad in April 2003 to run Iraq's Ministry of Industry and Minerals. Unlike many of his compatriots in the Green Zone, the rangy, retired American ambassador wasn't fazed by chaos. He'd been in Saigon during the Tet Offensive, Phnom Penh as it was falling to the Khmer Rouge and Mogadishu in the throes of Somalia's civil war. Once he received his Halliburton-issued Chevrolet Suburban, he disregarded security edicts and drove around Baghdad without a military escort. His mission, as he put it, "was to listen to the Iraqis and work with them."

He left after two months, disgusted and disillusioned. The U.S. occupation administration in Iraq, the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), placed ideology over pragmatism, he believed. His boss, viceroy L. Paul Bremer, refused to pay for repairs needed to reopen many looted state-owned factories, even though they had employed tens of thousands of Iraqis. Carney spent his days screening workers for ties to the Baath Party.

"Planning was bad," he wrote in his diary on May 8, "but implementation is worse."

"...Crocker, who spent the summer of 2003 helping to form Iraq's Governing Council, left the country frustrated with the CPA's reluctance to reach out to minority Sunnis. Even before the invasion, he wrote a blunt memo for then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell warning of the uncontrolled sectarian and ethnic tensions that would be released by the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

Petraeus, who spent 2003 commanding the 101st Airborne Division in Mosul, grew dismayed by the heavy-handed tactics fellow military commanders were using to combat insurgents. He also opposed the methods by which Bremer disbanded the Iraqi army and fired Baathists from government jobs. And he chafed at the way reconstruction funds, personnel and decision-making were centralized in Baghdad. The CPA's policies, he said in 2004, should have been "tempered by reality...."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...007011301372_pf.html”