Israel, Palestinians Shoot For Peace by End of '08

Source: Fox News

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — President Bush set a strong tone Tuesday on the opening day of the Mideast peace conference in Annapolis, Md., announcing a joint statement from Israeli and Palestinian leaders who pledged to move toward ending violence by the end of 2008.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/

I assume it will be linked to another thread but ....Fox News --priceless

:applause:

Good catch.

moron* flies in to repeat some flowery words fed to him and then flies out after the photo-op is done.

Nothing will come of this.

more fluff and bullshit from the shit-inator*.

The real people that need to be at that meeting weren't invited.

"pledged to move toward..." This is sad even for FUX.

I mean, look at all those boneheads from the past! Trying to solve the problems in the Middle East for years on end. Dumbasses. The MBA president shows them all how it's done: One day, summit at Annapolis. Bing. Bang. Boom. Problem solved. Peace will reign by the end of 2008. So mote it be. Hell, three days ago, Bush couldn't find Palestine on the map, and now he's brought peace to it.

Done and done, and supper's gettin' ready.

This jumped off the page at me:

"If the far right is worried about this progress, however, the far left is confused by it. They have scorned Bush's diplomatic forays as crass legacy-hunting, and are at a loss when he follows through. What they fear most is the chance that Bush could turn out to be capable of the kind of centrist diplomacy for which his father was known.

"But the North Korea talks show that Bush's centrist approach can produce results even on the toughest issues. Low expectations, his legacy-driven need to offset the Iraq fiasco, and sheer luck could help. The far right and left may find the possibility of moderate foreign policy successes by Bush troubling."

Considering that the writer doesn't have the least clue about Bush's history of diplomacy, it's anyone's guess how Time came to divine the way either far right or far left people think. In one sentence, they characterize the far left as scornful of Bush's diplomatic forays, then at a loss when he "follows through." Apparently, while there was plenty of room in this little story for completely stupid assertions, there wasn't even an extra column inch to spare to tell readers what the writer meant by Bush following through.

Further, the North Korea talks bullshit is just laughable. After six years of a foreign policy line that boils down to "the opposite of what Clinton did," and using North Korea as a rhetorical punching bag, Bush is suddenly a "centrist" who is producing results. What results? He's dicked around for seven years to finally get back to just about where the Clinton administration left things with North Korea. He hasn't made a lick of progress at all.

The "sheer luck" the writer alludes to probably includes foreign affairs writers at major national publications who don't have the first idea about anything that's happened before October 2007, so they can mistake all these sudden gyrations by the Bush administration as actual progress. Lucky Bush, once again.

The NK part is sadly hilarious because the writer either doesn't know to or refuses to connect that the time period without any Clinton connection/actual policy yielded nothing. They go right back to the original WORKING policy and *poof* they have a deal.

I am still trying to figure out what Bush has followed through on. It's not the elections in Iraq he was against those until he was for them and we haven't seen any in a while ....um.... he still supports Musharaf sort of well more than last week...uh....