Thursday, February 03, 2005

On The Mark -- Bush's Enter Strategy

After watching the Democratic response last night it really struck me for the first time how far apart the Republicans and Democrats are regarding the Middle East. Pelosi and Reid were talking about how, after the "successful" election in Iraq, we now need an exit strategy. Kennedy, earlier in the week, said we need to pull out 12,000 troops today just to show we mean business (which most of his fellow Dems quickly disagreed with as an immediate action, although they agree with the concept).

Pelosi and Reid's comments were moments after Bush had put Syria and Iran directly in his sights. In fact, I'd have to go back and look, but his language regarding Syria and Iran sounded just like what he said in the State of the Union address in 2003 before the invasion of Iraq. (Paraphrasing: "And I say to the people of Iran, as you fight for liberty, we will stand with you.")

Bush and his administration haven't offered an exit strategy because they DON'T HAVE ONE, but not for the reasons the Dems are talking about (incompetence). They don't have one because Iraq is their ENTER STRATEGY.

I could see them all in the Oval office chuckling as the Dems gave their rebuttal. "These guys really don't have a clue," they chortled, I'm sure. "Shock and awe? you ain't seen nothing yet."

Unfortunately, they're right. As has been evidenced over the past 4 years, the Dems are one step behind in understanding their competition.

To use a business metaphor, most businesses that function like the Dems are functioning right now are usually out of business before they realize what happened.

5 comments:

Me said...

You are, uh, right on the mark with that one. The DEMS for some reason haven't been able to wrap their mind around that. I've been saying for years that we needed a strong presence in the Middle East, not just a base in Kuwait, but a presence. Now we have that. Iraq is out of the picture as a threat in the Middle East, now we can focus on the two ugly stepsisters (Syria & Iran.) Plus, we'll be able to let Israel get in on the action when it comes to Syria.

And Mark, as a conservative - it's good to see some Dems out there are thinking rather than just reacting.

And Kennedy is a drunk. I don't think his own peers even listen to him anymore. He's like the fat kid in the back of the classroom making jokes and crying himself to sleep at night, with hookers and booze.

Me said...

Be happy and sad. Like when you sober up after taking home a questionable hooker. You're happy cause you got laid, but you're sad because your nuts have already started to itch.

Or you can just go with the Deer in the Headlights thing. That's usually where I leave people.

Chandira said...

I think that a lot of Dems are like me. They assume people think like they do. That's what I do, and it's not true.. I have been sadly disappointed out of my idealism many times. I'm learnin' but it's a slow process for this particular idealist.

B2 said...

Two more cents: I didn't like Iraq, I don't care for Iran, and I detest Syria. That being said, I'm not sure that we're making the situation over there any more stable. I think we're pissing off a lot of people and not really helping that many. Not that our actions should be based on the feelings of those countries we invade, but we need better plans for what to do once we strike a blow for liberty and ring the bell of freedom and torture the oppressers and sell the oil... well, you know what I mean.

Chandira said...

I don't know any Iraqis to judge but I know some Iranians and they're nice people. Didn't we go to liberate Iraqis? So why are the suddenly the bad guys? Because they don't like McDonalds? Halliburton? Walmart? Or because they don't like the church?

I know they do like Jesus. He's one of their Prophets.