'Maybe those neocons weren't so nutty'

Have recent events vindicated Bush's foreign policy?

Friday March 4, 2005
The Guardian

David Ignatius
Washington Post, March 2

"It's hard not to feel giddy, watching the dominoes fall. In Lebanon, 'people power' forced the resignation on Monday of Syria's puppet government; in Egypt, the Pharaonic Hosni Mubarak agreed on Saturday to allow other candidates to challenge his presidency-for-life; in Iraq, the momentum of January's elections is still propelling the nation forwards, despite bickering politicians and brutal suicide bombers...

"There's no stopping the Middle East's glorious catastrophe now that it has begun. We are careening around the curve of history, and it's useful to remember a basic rule for navigating slippery roads: once you're in the curve, you can't hit the brakes. The only way for America to keep this car on the road is to keep its foot on the accelerator."

Max Boot
Los Angeles Times, March 3


"It would be the height of hubris to claim that all these developments are due to US action alone. Pressure has been building up in the Middle East pressure cooker for decades; the long-suffering people of the region do not need any outside prompting to list a long litany of grievances against their dysfunctional governments. But it was the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent democratic elections there that blew the lid off the region ... Maybe, just maybe, those neocons weren't so nutty after all."

New York Post
Editorial, March 2


"There are no guarantees that any of the remarkable events now unfolding in the greater Middle East will lead to anything beyond more heartbreak and bloodshed. But it's also true that none of it would have happened if George Bush had toed the Times's foreign-policy line...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1430059,00.html

There's also the fallacy that if A happens before B, it doesn't necessarily mean A caused B.

That fallacy is called Post hoc ergo propter hoc

"After this, therefore because of this."

:evilgrin:

anymore than eliminating weapons of mass destruction was. It's all lies and rhetoric. What the neo-cons are really after is American domination of the Middle East and its resources, American hegemony. If democracy really does bust out in the ME it would be a neo-con nightmare. That's the last thing they want. They want to CONTROL the ME, not set it free.

What will the shrub junta say when we pull out of Iraq. "Oh well we tried!"


History does not show its alternatives.


Bush Lied, People Died, Media Cheered.

nothing at all is gained - the people in the Middle East are not faring any better than they have. All of a sudden the media act as if the Iraqis were doing just fine now when they've really never fared so badly. And we'll see how Lebanon does when the US have substituted for the Syrian "police force". All I can see so far is more and more bombs and more and more people dying every day.

And in my mind the end does NOT justify the means. Also democracy never was supposed to be the end. And I do not see any democracy at work yet.

--------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

message out once again? Bush's Europe tour was a disaster. Protests everywhere. So the Bushies haul out their PR Team and get some articles in Foreign newspapers. And Blair also needs a boost after Bush's disastrous trip, so its in both Bush and Blair's interest to get their "PR Teams" out there rolling.

Another case of don't believe what your own eyes and ears tell you, just believe what we say.

What have we done to inspire Hosni Mubarak?

I want to see less opinion and more factual analysis from the newspapers.

What will Ignatius say as the matter continues to spiral out of control and the caskets continue to roll in and the dollars continue to roll out?

Will he hold the neocons accountable for that, too?

Nope. No way!!!