Conservative Anger Grows Over Bush's Foreign Policy

[Rose Siding]

At a moment when his conservative coalition is already under strain over domestic policy, President Bush is facing a new and swiftly building backlash on the right over his handling of foreign affairs.

Conservative intellectuals and commentators who once lauded Bush for what they saw as a willingness to aggressively confront threats and advance U.S. interests said in interviews that they perceive timidity and confusion about long-standing problems including Iran and North Korea, as well as urgent new ones such as the latest crisis between Israel and Hezbollah.

"It is Topic A of every single conversation," said Danielle Pletka, vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank that has had strong influence in staffing the administration and shaping its ideas. "I don't have a friend in the administration, on Capitol Hill or any part of the conservative foreign policy establishment who is not beside themselves with fury at the administration."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801373.html

[KeepItReal]

1. Rove-ian GOP election strategy at work: The "I'm not with him" mantra!

Will it fly?

[tuvor]

25. Ooh, you were way ahead of me.

Although I don't think it takes a rove to point the finger at the captain of the sinking ship as you paddle away in your dinghy.

[aquart]

2. I don't know why this makes me laugh.

I've been beside myself with impotent fury since 2000. And now I'm giggling. Maybe I've gone insane.

[Timbuk3]

13. LOL

Maybe I've gone insane.

Welcome to the club. ;->

[Pirate Smile]

14. Laughing is better then having your head explode,

and sometimes the choice is between one or the other. :)

[Olney Blue]

30. "impotent fury"

Me too, and I'm female.

[babylonsister]

3. So these conservatives are angry because dimson isn't being

bellicose enough? Jeebus, when will enough be enough?

[Pirate Smile]

16. They think we should have already started bombing Iran and are

pissed that we haven't.

:crazy:

I think some people stopped paying their bills last week since they were sure the Rapture would be here by now.

Bush better turn it up a few notches, damnit! Why have nukes if you aren't willing to use them?



:hide:

[babylonsister]

27. No! I know there are conservatives who aren't that wacky.

Very troubling. So we start yet another war, but with what? Money and troops are sorely lacking. I don't get it.

[MissWaverly]

4. well, didn't Karl Rove say they could be counted on

in the post 9-11 world. Well, he was right, they could be counted on to be clueless about
9-11 and they were clueless on Katrina and Iraq and we can count on them to continue to
be clueless.

[CatholicEdHead]

5. So they think * is not agressive enough?

That is scary. The base apparently wants more blood than * is delivering.

Conservative intellectuals and commentators who once lauded Bush for what they saw as a willingness to aggressively confront threats and advance U.S. interests said in interviews that they perceive timidity and confusion about long-standing problems including Iran and North Korea, as well as urgent new ones such as the latest crisis between Israel and Hezbollah.

[Rose Siding]

8. I'd say you're right

If he did what they want, it certainly wouldn't please me but his numbers would rise.

[Roland99]

19. That's the take I got from the article. Bring back Perle and Wolfie!

Let's invade more countries!


It worked so well the first time!

[joemurphy]

6. What do they want Bush to do? Bomb Iran? Bomb North Korea?

Fight another war with them while we have ones going on in Iraq and Afghanistan already? Consies really baffle me. What armies are we going to throw at them? And what weapons do we use?

Bush is a dope. But picking fights with Iran and North Korea (or Syria, Hamas, and Hezbollah) that we can't finish would be even dopier.

But who knows, Bush still has a couple of years to do the job.

[saltpoint]

7. There they go again. Those conservative intellectuals and commentators.

ALWAYS emphasizing the negative.

What about that great pig roast in Germany?

And Dubya's generous gesture of offering a massage to Angela Merkel?

Plus, Dubya got in a bike ride at the G8 summit. And STAYED ON THE BIKE then entire time!

Hm? What about THAT, you right-wing smarty-pants pundits?

[babylonsister]

31. He stayed on the bike?

:wow:

[saltpoint]

32. LOL. Hey there, babylonsister. Long time no see.

Hope it's going smooth for ya in these warm summer days.

[AlamoDemoc]

9. I figure they are upset over the delay of coming of Christ...n/t

[leftchick]

10. who believes this propaganda

spewed forth by the AEI? omg! Please tell me no one here does!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. F AEI!

:cry:
:grr:

[rodeodance]

12. anger over "timidity and confusion about long-standing problems...."

[rodeodance]

15. lots of things they are whining about:

......Conservatives complain that the United States is hunkered down in Iraq without enough troops or a strategy to crush the insurgency. They see autocrats in Egypt and Russia cracking down on dissenters with scant comment from Washington, North Korea firing missiles without consequence, and Iran playing for time to develop nuclear weapons while the Bush administration engages in fruitless diplomacy with European allies. They believe that a perception that the administration is weak and without options is emboldening Syria and Iran and the Hezbollah radicals they help sponsor in Lebanon.

Most of the most scathing critiques of the administration from erstwhile supporters are being expressed within think tanks and in journals and op-ed pages followed by a foreign policy elite in Washington and New York.

But the Bush White House has always paid special attention to the conversation in these conservative circles. Many of the administration's signature ideas -- regime change in Iraq, and special emphasis on military "preemption" and democracy building around the globe -- first percolated within this intellectual community. In addition, these voices can be a leading indicator of how other conservatives from talk radio to Congress will react to policies.......

[Barrett808]

17. "Overwhelmingly it's been right."

Kenneth R. Weinstein, head of the conservative Hudson Institute, seemed more forgiving, recalling "the fury of the right" at Ronald Reagan in his second term for engaging then-Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. "Bush -- like Truman and Reagan -- is under attack from the left and the right," he said. "Given the laundry list of global challenges, the administration has had to make dozens and dozens of tough calls -- and overwhelmingly it's been right."

Wow, I want some of the drugs he's taking.

[Roland99]

18. The AEI (home to many neocon chickenhawks) is PISSED at their own people?!

:rofl:

:rofl:



M O R A N S ! ! ! !

[Mind_your_head]

34. That's the "decider"

Oh, I meant the DIVIDER, for ya.....he's 'good' at what he does, yes...indeed MMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[theanarch]

20. oh, i donno...

...but i'm willing to accept the validity of their anger; after all, this is the "it's WWIII (or IV or V), so let's nuke 'em all" crowd, who think CBW weapons are all "conventional" and have no after-effects; or that democracy can be spread with the speed of radioactivity. Many of them, like Wm. Kristol, James Woolsey, Richard Perle, are stark raving paranoids and even starker-raving warmongers. To the extent that it fractures the GOP, and exposes the public to their loony-tune notions, i'm all for it. The danger is that, should the GOP appear to be in danger of losing the election (e.g. control of one or both houses of congress), the greater the temptation for Junior to push the button that really will ignite a world war against US...but then, since the only concern is winning the election, and nothing else, they won't care. Hell, it may even be seen as working to their advantage.

[stevedeshazer]

21. My God. "It's the triumph of Kerryism."

<snip>

Kenneth Adelman, a Reagan administration arms-control official who is close to Vice President Cheney, said he believes foreign policy innovation for White House ended with Bush's second inaugural address, a call to spread democracy throughout the world.

"What they are doing on North Korea or Iran is what Kerry would do, what a normal middle-of-the-road president would do," he said. "This administration prided itself on molding history, not just reacting to events. Its a normal foreign policy right now. It's the triumph of Kerryism."

</snip>

These people are insane.

[chill_wind]

26. Yep. Kenneth "Cake Walk' Adelman. We don't need no rinky-dink coalition

of powers to convince the Washington Establishment that we're right.

"Ken Adelman, a consummate Washington insider and current member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, has been involved in a number of key right-wing policy efforts dating back to the 1970s, when he was a member of the original Committee on the Present Danger. More recently, he strongly supported the war in Iraq and took part in the pro-war lobbying campaign of the Project for the New American Century. He also is a member of the most recent incarnation of the Committee on the Present Danger, which was revived in June 2004 by a number of erstwhile Cold Warriors with the aim of “winning the global war against terrorism and the movements and ideologies that drive it.”

Before and during the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Adelman, longtime editor at the Washingtonian magazine and a frequent commentator and contributor to both print and broadcast news outlets, made some bold predictions that turned out to be wildly wrong. In February 2002, he wrote in the Washington Post: “I believe that demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk … This President Bush does not need to amass rinky-dink nations as ‘coalition partners' to convince the Washington establishment that we're right.” Shortly after the U.S. invaded Iraq and began its ill-fated search for WMD, a confident Adelman pronounced: “I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction” (Washington Post, March 23, 2003)."

(...)http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/982

Never mind the rivers of blood and mayhem in their first grotesquely botched experiment. :On to the next! What's taking so long? Let's do Iran! Yeehaw. :

Totally craven .

[babylonsister]

28. A Kerryism? Shit. I wish I had Kerry as a real CiC. It's

gross that Adelman is even using Kerry's name; could Kerry sue for assasination of character?

[Nothing Without Hope]

22. These people are NOT CONSERVATIVES. They are radical authoritarians,

fascists, but NOT conservatives by any measure at all. That's their false mantle of trustworthiness, and it's past time it was taken from them to expose them for what they truly are.

[bluestateguy]

23. In other words: "Neo-Conservative Anger Grows Over Bush's Foreign Policy"

The "batshit insane" wing of the Republican Party is angry with the "mainline insane" wing of the Republican Party.

Oh, and this Danielle Pletka woman should have no place in the making of American foreign policy. She is a foreigner, not an American, and foreigners should not be American foreign policymakers. Alexander Hamilton expressed concern about this in Federalist paper #22.

[tuvor]

24. Maybe it's time for the GOP to distance themselves from bushco

And in a couple of years they'll be in a better position to make everyone believe they won yet again in 2008.

Yeah, I know. Crazy talk.

[neverforget]

29. Funny how acting aggressively has put us in the position of not being

able to do a damn thing about any of the other neo-con wars. You reap what you sow you cowardly fucking neocons.

[kurth]

33. Fury, Wrath, Anger, Disgust, Disappointment, Unease - All BULLSHIT

These assholes are card-carrying members of the Bush cult, and they always will be card-carrying members of the Bush cult.

[Amonester]

35. Yeah, but the Bu$h Familly Evil Empire's House Of Saud called...

their bid'ness partners (popy&co) sayin' they don't want to see their oil rigs burnin' up in fumes by any Iranian exocets if those extremist RW chickenhawk warmongers succeed to convince Herr Rummy & Darth Chenious... Perhaps 'cuz they've already been 'briefed' on that particular 'glitch' out of the pile of what would go 'wrong' at the moment Iran would be so aggressively (and illegally, again) attacked.

They made it pretty clear there would be no spigot left to 'open up' and gas would be catapulted to way over $100/gal. So the BFEE is... kinda 'stuck' there, methinks. Hence the pig farce...

[Polemicist]

36. The lonely cry of the loonies in the wilderness...

Where they should remain. The Bush Administration acted upon the "theories" and "conjectures" of the loonies in their first term and learned that the best place for their theoretical thoughts, is safely ensconced in the "Zoos" of their "Think Tanks".

When you let the loonies out into the real world, they cause irreparable harm to our national interests. Bush might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he's smart enough not to be duped by the neo-cons more than about a dozen times.

No, we aren't going to fight Israel's wars for them. No, Israel's enemies, who don't attack us, are not our enemies. No Iran isn't going to get a bomb anytime soon and their leaders aren't crazy (like the loonies) and they don't plan on committing national suicide by attacking America with a nuclear weapon, or giving such a weapon to anyone who might use it. Ditto to the North Korean regime.

Keep the NeoCons in their think tank zoos with the Panda bears. And hope they are much less successful at reproducing.

[bluestateguy]

37. Thing is...

and God please don't let this sound like a defense of the Bush Administration, but the Administration has to actually govern, facing all of the constraints of governing. These "scholars", on the other hand, can just sit in their think tanks and theorize and philosophize. In fact, neo-conservative "intellectuals" actually command very little respect from real academics who study international relations.

[Polemicist]

38. Unfortunately, many NeoCons were in government...

positions at the beginning of the Bush Administration, placed there by the Cheney/Rumsfeld alliance. They were sprinkled throughout our National Security organizations, the Pentagon, the NSA, and the State Department. Wolfowitz, Feith, Hadley, Bolton, et al, were positioned to advance their NeoCon theories into action during the first Bush Administration term. Pushed hard by Cheney and Rumsfeld.

Some of those are gone now. And their theories have had some of the shine knocked off them, for those who remain. The realists in the Bush Administration, led by Condie Rice, seem to have more influence than they did in the first term.

But echos of the loonies remain. The "bomb Iran" stuff is clearly still considered by the Bushies. The theory of non-engagement, and advancement of diplomacy by not engaging in diplomacy still hold sway with the Bushites. They refuse direct talks with Iran or North Korea and refuse to act to stop the violence in Lebanon.

The loonies are still inside the government. Not all of them have yet been returned to retirement in their "think tank zoos". It will take a Democratic Presidential victory in 2008 to fully retire these yahoos to the dustbin of history.

[BlueInPhilly]

39. Remember the 6 Feet Under episode

where some inflatable dolls floated and the woman started chasing after them because she thought the rapture has started - and she was killed? How about floating lots of them inflatable dolls, eh? Let's see how many people will bite.

[Polemicist]

44. That was one of the greatest beginnings to a show...

I've ever seen. The woman leaves her car in a parking lot and walks out into traffic, watching the blow up dolls float up into the sky, thinking the Rapture was here. And she gets run over by a car and killed.

Many great beginnings to 6 feet under episodes. That one was perhaps the best.

[groovedaddy]

40. Not all conservatives are stupid people

but all stupid people are conservative. They were stupid to believe him in the first place!

[leesa]

41. So in other words, he not being nuts enough for these freaks.

[Nothing Without Hope]

42. ***PERMALINK FOR THIS JUAN COLE POST*** and more LINKS:

http://www.juancole.com/2006/07/israel-kills-57-in-lebanon-arbour.html

(The link in the OP is to his entire blog)

There's much more in this post, and indeed every day this extremely knowledgable and insightful expert adds valuable comments and reports, many of which are overlooked or deliberately ignored in the US corporate media.

I am heartsick not only at what is happening but also at how the US congress is baying with excitement and bloodlust over it, many Dems such as Harry Reid along with the GOPs. Read the Senate Resolution, which calls for immediate sanctions on Iran and Syria and blames the government of Lebanon - and gives Israel open season to do whatever the hell it wants:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1674185
ACTION ALERT: Oppose House Resolution Supporting Israel's Attacks!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1674661
SENATE RESOLUTION calling for Iran, Syria SANCTIONS & supporting Israel

Only a courageous few are daring to buck this "If Israel wants to destroy a country and kill & starve its civilians, it's WONDERFUL!!!" echo chamber. Dennis Kucinich is one of them:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2730810

Even here at DU a high proportion of posters on the Lebanon attacks blindly support Israel's thuggish, murderous tactics. Yes, Israel has the right to defend itself. But NO state, not the US and not Israel, has the right to destroy another and target civilians. In fact, what Israel is doing is ILLEGAL UNDER US LAW:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1668742
thread title: "Israel Violates Law on U.S. Weapons in Mideast"

Finally, there is no way that these attacks will increase Israel's long-range security. Hezbollah originated largely because of fear and resentment of Israel's past actions: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4314423.stm What horrors of terrorism will THESE murderous attacks spawn?

Israel's government assumes that they can do anything they please because the US government, wrapped up by the lobbyists, will always come to the rescue and give ever more cash and armaments and military support.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/12/AR2006071201627_pf.html

A Beautiful Friendship?
In search of the truth about the Israel lobby's influence on Washington

By Glenn Frankel
Sunday, July 16, 2006; W13

(snip)

Thanks to the work of the lobby and its allies, Israel gets more direct foreign aid -- about $3 billion a year -- than any other nation. There's a file cabinet somewhere in the State Department full of memoranda of understanding on military, diplomatic and economic affairs. Israel gets treated like a NATO member when it comes to military matters and like Canada or Mexico when it comes to free trade. There's an annual calendar full of meetings of joint strategic task forces and other collaborative sessions. And there's a presidential pledge, re-avowed by Bush in the East Room, that the United States will come to Israel's aid in the event of attack.

On Capitol Hill the Israel lobby commands large majorities in both the House and Senate. Polls show strong public support for Israel -- a connection that has grown even deeper after the September 11 attacks. The popular equation goes like this: Israelis equal good guys, Arabs equal terrorists. Working the Hill these days, says Josh Block, spokesman for the premier Israeli lobbying group known as AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, "is like pushing at an open door."

Not everyone believes this is a good thing. In March two distinguished political scientists -- Stephen Walt from Harvard and John Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago -- published a 42-page, heavily footnoted essay arguing that the Bush administration's support for Israel and its related effort to spread democracy throughout the Middle East have "inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security."

The professors claim that our intimate partnership with Israel is both dangerous and unprecedented. "Other special interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest," they argue. They go on to say that the war in Iraq "was due in large part to the Lobby's influence," and that the same combine is "using all of the strategies in its playbook" to pressure the administration into being aggressive and belligerent with Iran. The bottom line: "Israel's enemies get weakened or overthrown, Israel gets a free hand with the Palestinians, and the United States does most of the fighting, dying, rebuilding and paying."

(snip)

[newspeak]

43. a bunch of war mongering freaks!!!

every last one of them!!!! I was listening to AAR the other day and they stated that a member of the Federal Reserve Board stated that we are broke!!!! These mental cases have broken our country while making a bundle for their multi national corp buddies. I CAN'T TAKE MUCH MORE OF THIS!!!!!!:mad: GOD, SOMEONE TAKE CHARGE OF THE INSANE ASYLUM!!!!! At least with Nixon, there was someone there to make sure things didn't get too out of hand--who do we have now watching our backs? They're all fekkin narcissistic, sociopathic bonkers!