THE IRAQ SENILE, STUPIDITY, AND SURRENDER GROUP

One hundred and forty years ago, British philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) wrote:

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse… A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. (Dissertations and Discussions 1867 Vol.1 p. 26.)

A perfect description of the Democrat Party leadership and the editors of the New York Times today.  Which is why they are hyping the Iraq Study Group Report to the moon. 

They hope to use the hype to force President Bush to surrender in Iraq.  They will not succeed.

It has not dawned on the over-the-hill guys who chaired the Iraq Study Group, Jimmy Baker and Lee Hamilton, dazzled as they are by the media spotlight, that they are being used to promote the surrender agenda of the left.

So Jimmy Baker burps up naïve absurdities like "Flip Syria!" to the press, and doesn't grasp that Syria has flipped him.  Neither he nor Hamilton have the foggiest understanding of what motivates Iran's Ahmadinejad with whom they want the US to "engage" – the apocalyptic hojjatieh interpretation of Shia Islam (explained in Yogi in Iran).

Neither are even aware of the possibility of effecting regime change in Iran through supporting anti-regime resistance movements emerging throughout the country.  Convincing evidence of Baker's senility in particular.

For he was chief of staff at the Reagan White House – 1981-1985 – when the Reagan Doctrine of support for anti-Soviet insurgencies was being created and implemented.  He was nothing more than an obstacle in the way, and played no role whatever in the Reagan Doctrine's success. 

Yet surely you'd think he'd at least remember that success, and inquire as to how it could apply to Iran.  Obviously not.

Yesterday (12/06), I and a small group of conservatives met with a top White House aide (whose comments were not for attribution so I can't name him).  In so many words, he told us that President Bush's response to the Iraq Study Group Report and the media hysteria around it is:  "Thank you for sharing."

"There will be no ‘graceful exit' from Iraq as the press is promoting, for the president realizes this is a Democrat code term for ‘graceful surrender'," said the aide.

His most telling statement came in response to an anti-Semitic, Israel-hating Buchananite in the group, who lauded the report for advocating a "comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace" as its centerpiece.  "Solving the Palestinian crisis is the most important issue," he argued.  "The Moslem world will never trust the president until he helps solve it.  I was happy to see the report says that the road to peace in Baghdad goes through Jerusalem."

The aide visibly bristled and there was anger in his voice.  "I want to make it very clear that the White House could not disagree with you more."  That is a direct word-for-word quote.  "The president is not concerned with what the Moslem world thinks of him on this issue, and it is not a major factor in his discussions regarding Iraq."  Word-for-word from the White House.

The ISG report is classic Jimmy Baker diplomacy, the motto of which is:  Hurt your friends and help your enemies.  It is a cut-and-cover strategy of retreat under the guise of "engaging" Iran with the enticement of pressuring Israel into surrender.

While the aide was uncommittal to me regarding White House support for Iranian resistance groups, at least he didn't deny that such support was being contemplated – or had already started.

I came away reassured that GW was not about to be duped by the Iraq Senile, Stupidity, and Surrender Group, nor by its media cheerleaders.  When this dawns on the left, expect yet another torrent of Bush-hatred hysteria.