President Bush’s Knesset speech has created a furor and those who fear and resent the truth have reacted accordingly. Whether or not the speech was really directed at Obama and his ilk is for Bush to know and the world to wonder. The truth as President sees it is that negotiating with bad people is generally bad business. He provided ample history to make his point, and none of his protagonists have demonstrated where negotiating with really bad people makes much sense—at least historically. This brings me to the question of Myanmar. Here we have a regime that is among the most brutal in the world, at least in modern times. To say the least, they are bad guys. If two weeks ago, they expressed an intention to kill 150,000 of their citizens, just on general principles, the world understandably would have been outraged. But how much negotiation would have prevented them from doing it. Threats maybe, but not negotiation. For the last two weeks the International Community has been unable to negotiate even the slimmest of access to Myanmar to provide humanitarian relief. One would likely think that if you can’t negotiate with bad guys when the only thing at stake is humanitarian relief, then negotiations when our freedom and our way of life is on the table might not be a prudent thing to do.

With Nasrallah now “sowing his oats” … Lebanon faces a crisis. Where will those who have bars, and open cafes, where the dames wear bikinis … Where will they all go?

Again, Lebanon’s business is a bill of goods. Sold as “the paris of the meditterainian, or some such falderol.

And, because of the anti-Semitism? You don’t think that among all those fools some aren’t asking “why?”

Israel once stepped in and tried to help.

Today? Jumblatt learned that the Lebanese Army would rather go back to their barracks, than defend his home.

So, Druze and Christians alike, are learning bitter lessons.

Since they didn’t want to learn “sweet ones.” Go ahead, see if I care?

As to the “business of drugs,” If you look East, to Afghanistan, you see a similar economy. Instead of hashish, poppy production. Doesn’t matter.

Wanna fight the War on Drugs? I don’t. It’s a meaningless enterprise that employs people. If you dropped this war? Where would you go to employ all those badge holders? Where badge holding never impeded traffic.

Because, when people want stuff, there’s no religion out there that can turn “forbidden fruits” into inedible objects.

I have no idea why, in the summer of 2006, when Olmert was given the choice by Bush’s White House, he (and the IDF), together, decided “now wasn’t the time to change horses.”

Of course in RAID ON THE SUN, the just published reality book about the raid on Osarik (June 7, 1981), you can learn a lot about all the years it took to plan this adventure! And, the side trips include the Mossad’s involvement in “hurting a few scientists,” along the way. But it wasn’t “enough.”

Until America deals with the saud’s, and stops this funding of Madrassas, we will get nowhere. What can you do? Buy popcorn.

As to Bush’s popularity, it’s gone the way of the wind. Which shows ya, once you get the job you keep doing it the way you want. Till the next election.

As to Bush’s motives, I always thought the Saud’s threw 9/11 America’s way (by funding this, the same way they fund the hate through the mosques.) And, Bush was to be their servant.

He went into Irak fully thinking the “plum” would fall into the hands of the sunnis; who are best equipped, the story goes, among arabs, to run things. Well? Where are they, today, in Lebanon? Or even in Irak? Since General Patraeus had to bring them back from the brink.

Also, in Irak, you still have Chalabi (who is the real force behind the Iraqi Army.) He’s the man with the billions, that he “took” from Jordan’s bank. And, his militia is American trained. You think he left Irak? Nope. In Bagdhad. Walking around. Building bridges into the population. Making the streets safer. And, up ahead? When the political contest comes, you’ll get to see if he can do better “than last time.” And, if Maliki does worse?

Allawi is also in Irak. In Parliament. And, as soon as Maliki allowed contact with Sadr’s goons, according to IRAQ THE MODEL, the sunni brothers told that there was now cooperation in Parliament. Allawi was moving forward.

As to becoming the leadership in the Mideast? At every front the Saud’s failed. Which is why they keep pounding on Israel to move back on her borders.

So many American presidents! Start with FDR. He promised the saudi potentates that he wouldn’t allow Jews to come to ‘palistine.’ Then, you got Truman.

Fancy this. Truman knew Israel was going to get attacked in 1948. But as a politician, he wanted to duck responsibility. So, he recognized Israel. May 14, 1948.

I’ll skip forward. But you can be sure the Israeli prime ministers got plenty of heartburn from LBJ, and Nixon. And, Carter. And, Reagan. And, well yes, both Bush’s. So, you’re not out of the woods in this department just yet.

Where islam has advanced? Well imbedded now not just at the BBC, but in Washington DC’s governmental operations. And, ya know what? Jews aren’t welcome. Just in case you thought everything was being played fair and equal. No, it is not.

Of course, from Harvard on down; you can still fail if you lose your reputation.

The CIA has a reputation? Just asking.

Even in the Mossad, there’s been a cooling off of cooperation from America, starting with Nixon’s terms.

Going it alone ain’t easy.

But knowing that you just can’t count on your friends, will bring you full circle to FDR’s position, during the 1930’s, that all of Europe STANK. And, wasn’t was the military involvement. So, FDR held off.

Holding off is sometimes about the best policy you have.

While Bush is trying to deliver something … to appease the Saud’s, still. While also learning lessons from ENRON. And, how Texas can be a millstone, as much as a byway for cronies.

Irak? You think Americans think its been worth the coin? I don’t. But we are there. And, sooner or later, Bush did have to learn to listen to the Iraqis. ALL OF THEM! Instead of having his hopes that the saud’s could pocket the leadership, he’s had to adjust to reality.

Don’t we all.

Now? I can’t quite wrap my mind around Obama. But then again, I know the democrapic party. LBJ wormed his way into the White House. And, found the people hated his guts. So he ran back to Texas. Hubert Humphrey was really, really a nice man. But he was done in, in Chicago. And, Nixon took the White House prize in a landslide.

McGovern? He won one state. Dukakis? Against the Elder Bush, he got ten states. Or what is called: The Egghead and Black voters. Period. So, he lost.

Shnooks for president. Doesn’t matter if you regard charisma as an important quality. You don’t need good looks, honesty, or personality, to “win” at politics.

Bush’s major failing though is that he just can’t talk. Can’t give a speech to save his life. So whatever ideas motivated his actions; there was no one speaking up. And, Cheney? He just sneers.

Olmert, by the way, has his hands full.

Can journalists still pile on with their malice?

Winston Churchill, who was, in fact, a collosus as a speaker and as a prime minister said: “Truth is always attacked by malice.” Comes with the territory.

Truth wins out in the end. Well? Churchill got to write a large part of WW2 history; so he should know.

1) You’re assuming that the US is going to complete disappear. Germany, Japan and South Korea illustrate this will not happen (some big bases are being constructed right now). Sure it will be far less troops but it will be more than enough to keep Iran at bay.

2) The Iraqi people do NOT want a Shia theocracy. Polls show this. The polls also show that the popularity of the Sadr type militias has dropped drastically and particularly amongst the Shia. They Kurds and Sunnis just re-enforce this.

“Are you speaking of Iraq? Iraqis are living in a combined state of civil war, poverty, fear of death and occupation.”

Usual uninformed ignorance. From a Mar 2008 poll by ABC.

* 7 in 10 Iraqis say things overall are going well for them.
* Fifty-six percent say their lives are better now than before the war

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/GoodMorningAmerica/Iraq_anniversary_poll_040314.html

“It will inevitably be a Shiite, Iranian sympathetic government.”

Really? That must explain why the largely shiite government just removed Iranian backed Sadr’s militias from Basra and Sadr city by force.

The issue here is that you and your ilk have a superficial understand of the situation.

Lebanon is about to die by a 1000 Muslim cuts. Nothing different will happen in Iraq when the coalition leaves, whether in 1,2,5 or 10 years.

I mean 60 million new people living under democracy is a disgraceful deed. I agree totally that we should of left them under Saddam against their wishes. Liberation from tyranny should be reserved only for civilized folk like Europeans.

That evil Bush. *scratches his Che Guevara t-shirt*

Stan