On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:15:00 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:29:03 -0500, DSK wrote:

Yet further proof that invading Iraq was the wrong thing to do... wrong
country at the wrong time...

NOBBY quote:
Egypt and Syria Play Ball -- No Thanks to the Left
By Ben Johnson
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 28, 2005

From Hosni Mubarak's opening up Egyptian elections for the first time,
to
Syria's strong efforts to accommodate American demands for withdrawal
from
Lebanon and for cooperation in Iraq, the Middle East is changing

So when are you leaving for that motorcycle trip you cancelled because
it was too dangerous in Lebanon?

BTW Syria has been occupying Lebanon for at least 25 years. Back when I
was in the Navy, and Reagan was President, there was a big operation
against Syrian backed militias, and then almost simultaneously we
intervened to protect Palestinian civilians from the Isrealis. I was
there and saw much of it first-hand.

So why is this a priority for Bush all of a sudden? Why is the remote
possibility of re-opening peace negotiations reckoned as a huge success?
So as to cover up the obvious & continual failure that's prevailed until
now?

I guess the obvious fact that the Middle East is too dangerous, and
terrorism is escalating, "proves" to you that Bush has done a good job.

DSK

What George doesn't get done in the next four years, Jeb will finish!


I can hear the 2008 campaign slogan now:

"Eight more years! Eight more years!"


Definitely has a ring to it!

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:22:55 -0500, DSK wrote:

So why is this a priority for Bush all of a sudden?


NOYB wrote:
Because Syria is the wedge between Israeli and Palestinian peace.


And they have been for 25+ years. Why ignore that part of my post? They
were there 4 years ago and Bush ignored them. They were there 3 years
ago and Bush decided to invade Iraq instead.

Now all of a sudden, Syria... which was cooperating with US counter
terrorist intel ops... and a secure & stable secular quasi-democracy...
ruled by a progressive & pro-Western group... is on the hit list.

Getting them out of Lebanon would be nice, but it would have been nice
25 years ago. So Bush & Cheney just pulled their head out of the sand?
Or did they decide here's good material for a razzle-dazzle ploy to
distract all but the most gullible (ie you and John H) from their other
miserable foreign policy failures?

And of course, the fact that they *still* haven't caught Osama Bin
Laden, and they *still* have exactly ZERO links between Iraq & terrorism.


Why is the remote possibility of re-opening peace negotiations reckoned
as
a huge success?


You're kidding, right?

No

With Arafat gone, Abbas seems to be pointing the Palestinians in a new
direction (but Hizbollah isn't cooperating).


And?

Looks to me like the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" is stuck at
about the same place it was in 1979. Each side is stuck at the same
intractable demands and the same unrealistic expectations.

It would be very nice if Abbas could reign in his terrorists, and Sharon
put a muzzle on some of his hard-liners (except that he's a har-liner
himself).

Of course I am hopeful that *this* time things will go forward, the
violence will die down, resentments will subside, and peace will have a
real chance. But it's not at all due to anything the Bush Administration
has done, and their blustering toward Syria isn't going to help either
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the anti-US terrorism in the region.
It's just a lot of hot air aimed in the wrong direction... and even if
they *were* about to accomplish something, it would be 5 years later
than they could have done the same thing.

But hey, maybe I'm too picky. Considering Bush & Cheney's record so far,
maybe this really is a huge success for them!

DSK

Personally, Doug, I find it hard to believe that you are hopeful for
*any* good
to come to the middle east.

I think you, and many others around here, must pray hard for a succession
of
failures. Else, how could you say, "I told you so."

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary
to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

You hit the nail on the head John.

Hell, just look at the OT news stories they continuously post....they go
out of their way to focus on the doom and gloom. Look at the post this
morning from a certain member here about the 100 or so dead in Iraq from
the suicide bomber....it was like he was getting some sort of pleasure in
posting it. The only thing missing was his little smiley face at the end
of the article.




Sorry, did not proof read before posting. Edit made.

John H wrote:
No. I'm not wrong.

Of course you have to believe that, but why is it that you can never
come up with any facts to support your statements?


... I do find it hard to believe that you are hopeful for *any*
good to come out of anything while Bush is in power.


Why? Because deep down in your heart of hearts, you know what a
money-grubbing hypocrit GWB Jr is, and you dooubt any good can ever come
of his actions?

DSK

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:01:55 -0500, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
No. I'm not wrong.

Of course you have to believe that, but why is it that you can never
come up with any facts to support your statements?


... I do find it hard to believe that you are hopeful for *any*
good to come out of anything while Bush is in power.


Why? Because deep down in your heart of hearts, you know what a
money-grubbing hypocrit GWB Jr is, and you dooubt any good can ever come
of his actions?

DSK

Like I say, I hope you catch your tail.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes