Key pillar of Bush policy on Iraq being questioned (no peace from vote)

[Barrett808]

Key pillar of Bush policy on Iraq being questioned
Some analysts, insiders unsure democracy will end insurgency

Tyler Marshall, Louise Roug, Los Angeles Times
Sunday, October 9, 2005

Washington -- Senior U.S. officials have begun to question a key presumption of U.S. strategy in Iraq: that establishing democracy there can erode and ultimately eradicate the insurgency that grips the country.

The expectation that political progress would bring stability has been fundamental to the Bush administration's approach to rebuilding Iraq, as well as a central theme of White House rhetoric to convince the American public that its policy in Iraq remains on course.

But within the last two months, U.S. analysts with access to classified intelligence data have started to challenge this precept, noting what they termed a "significant and disturbing disconnect" between apparent advances on the political front and any progress in reducing insurgent attacks.

With Saturday's constitutional referendum looming as an event more likely to divide than unify the country, some administration officials have concluded that the quest for democracy in Iraq, at least in its current form, actually could strengthen the insurgency.

(more)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/10/09/MNGFDF4U6D1.DTL

[BadGimp]

1. raise your hand if you are suprised

..thought so..

[BootinUp]

4. and roll your eyes if you're not

:eyes:

[yorkiemommie1]

8. so many of us aren't

i can recall people at my work saying this was going to happen.

BushGang: WE TOLD YOU SO !!!

:eyes:

[LynnTheDem]

2. WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.

Reason America INVADED a nation that had been doing NOTHING WHATSOEVER to anyone; WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, lied BUSH.

[NYC Liberal]

3. Exactly and BUSH is the weapon of mass destruction here.

He claimed Iraq was the aggressor, but who INVADED TWO countries? Who toppled TWO governments? Who is OCCUPYING TWO countries? Who killed thousands and wounded thousands more to do so?

That would be GEORGE WALKER BUSH not Saddam Hussein.

[Toots]

5. I've had my flower shop opened for years waiting for their huge order

Pretty sure it will be coming next week. I just odered three more credit cards to fill up while I am waiting. The order will come any day now....

[mike_c]

6. there are no "pillars of Bush policy in Iraq...."

The administration and its toadies in congress have never had the slightest clue what was going on in Iraq. The U.S. caused the insurgency, for crying out loud, and our occupation strengthens it-- until they come to grips with that, there simply cannot be any coherent, proactive policy for dealing with current events on the ground or planning for the future of Iraq.

[leftchick]

7. file this under DUH!

You would have to be a moran to have every believed that happy horseshit,

:eyes:

[Trajan]

9. Make-It-Up-As-You-Go ....

There was never a 'tenet' that democracy would 'solve' an insurgency, because THIS US administration denied such an insurgency would arise ....

The Pollyannas of the PNAC, whom now form the greater part of the US government, ignored the realities presented to them by denying credible intelligence, instead hand picking those tidbits that suited their own fantastic worldview by 'stovepiping' raw data to the very idealogues whom created this fantasy world, and now WE reap the reality, the pragmatic facts, of their failures and misjudgements ....

Tis sad so many young men and women have died, so many families who have lost their loved ones, so many citizens who have watched as their college educations were SQUANDERED on a false rationale for war and the cronyistic tendencies that followed ...

Blood and treasure lost ....

Blood and treasure lost forever ....

How DARE they claim they are best at governing ? ...

How DARE they ! ....

[VegasWolf]

10. This is HUGH and very SERIES! nt