NationStates Jolt Archive

Well this is interesting...


By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: November 19, 2006

Filed at 7:05 a.m. ET

LONDON (AP) -- Military victory is no longer possible in Iraq, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said in a television interview broadcast Sunday.

In a wide ranging interview on British Broadcasting Corp. television, Kissinger presented a bleak vision of Iraq, saying the U.S. government must enter into dialogue with Iraq's regional neighbors -- including Iran -- if any progress is to be made in the region.

''If you mean by 'military victory' an Iraqi Government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible,'' he said on the BBC's Sunday AM breakfast show."


http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Britain-Iraq-Kissinger.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

It took 3 years to realise this?

Bloody hell...

And, let's face it, Kissinger knows all about unwinnable wars...


Ba Dum Tish

And, let's face it, Kissinger knows all about unwinnable wars...


Ba Dum Tish
Heh!

Kissinger, like a lot of people, is saving his political future by dissociating himself with Bush. Bush is the scapegoat.

And, let's face it, Kissinger knows all about unwinnable wars...


Ba Dum Tish

Touché!!!

Kissinger, like a lot of people, is saving his political future by dissociating himself with Bush. Bush is the scapegoat.
What political future does Kissinger have, outside of commentary?

we "won" a long time ago. our objective was to take out saddam hussein and to make sure that the iraqi government had no ability to attack us or our allies.

that is done.

we assumed that iraq without hussein would be a happy happy land where everyone cooperated to build a new democratic government without regard for religion, tribe, faction, or recent history.

big mistake.

no, we cant shove representative democracy down the throats of people who would rather spend the time fighting over who gets to be top dog. if that is what winning would be, we cant win. the decision of what kind of government replaces the regime of saddam hussein has to be up to the iraqi people and has to be decided in a way that brings stability to the country. if the only way to do that is civil war resulting in a new dictator, then thats what it has to be. we cant force them to cooperate with each other.

What political future does Kissinger have, outside of commentary?

That's what I would like to know.

What political future does Kissinger have, outside of commentary?

What do you mean, outside of commentary? His commentary is quite noticed, as evidenced by this article for example. That there is political influence, and hence a political future. I'm not saying he's gonna run for office.

But hey maybe someone will appoint him to head another Commission or something.

This is all political double-speak, frankly. All the pundits who pushed for this war waxed on and on about "freeing Iraq from a 'dictator'," and "helping Iraq move toward democracy." They even touted the elections as evidence of how right they were about Iraq's future and the justness of the war.

Now these same pundits are conceding the validity of what the detractors of this war had been saying from the beginning. It's not enough to say "we got Saddam." The American people did not support that as the sole---or even the most important---goal of the war. Nor can you fall back on the tired old "WMD and nuclear weapons" argument. Both of those bases proved to be as hollow as the intelligence on which they were allegedly based.

How about just offering up a good old-fashioned mea culpa? Just say "we were wrong and you were right about Iraq."

That would save more political futures than the present dodge ever will.

:headbang:

What do you mean, outside of commentary? His commentary is quite noticed, as evidenced by this article for example. That there is political influence, and hence a political future. I’m not saying he’s gonna run for office.
Aye, but this article was noticed precisely because of Kissinger’s past politics.

It’s not notable because Kissinger is radically changing his political views, or trying to distance himself from the Republican administration, but because someone, with his political past, is against the ridiculous war.

But meh, I’m being rather pedantic.

This is all political double-speak, frankly. All the pundits who pushed for this war waxed on and on about "freeing Iraq from a 'dictator'," and "helping Iraq move toward democracy." They even touted the elections as evidence of how right they were about Iraq's future and the justness of the war.

Now these same pundits are conceding the validity of what the detractors of this war had been saying from the beginning. It's not enough to say "we got Saddam." The American people did not support that as the sole---or even the most important---goal of the war. Nor can you fall back on the tired old "WMD and nuclear weapons" argument. Both of those bases proved to be as hollow as the intelligence on which they were allegedly based.

How about just offering up a good old-fashioned mea culpa? Just say "we were wrong and you were right about Iraq."

That would save more political futures than the present dodge ever will.

:headbang:

We have NEVER been at war with Eurasia. We have ALWAYS been at war with Eastasia!

Aye, but this article was noticed precisely because of Kissinger’s past politics.


Well, yeah. Future politics is based off past politics for the most part, which is why people doubt Obama has a chance for 2008 - not enough 'past' to support that particular 'future.'

The fact that Kissinger's statements make the news whereas mine doesn't means he is either a celebrity or a political figure - in this case a bit of both, but the latter is hard to deny.


It’s not notable because Kissinger is radically changing his political views

Of course.

, or trying to distance himself from the Republican administration

I disagree. That is undeniably a goal when this particular administration is still in favour of the war.

, but because someone, with his political past, is against the ridiculous war.

It may be notable for that reason, yes. But the timing is pretty politically convinient. If he'd been as 'against it' earlier, he would have been rhetorically dismissed and we wouldn't hear so much about Kissinger now. He's a canny politician, that's all.

Blair also said the war was a big mistake. It seems like the only people that still think it was a good idea or could be won are in the white house.

Well, yeah. Future politics is based off past politics for the most part, which is why people doubt Obama has a chance for 2008–not enough ‘past’ to support that particular ‘future.’
Is that the young, savvy-looking Democrat chap? UK citizen here.

It may be notable for that reason, yes. But the timing is pretty politically convinient. If he’d been as ‘against it’ earlier, he would have been rhetorically dismissed and we wouldn’t hear so much about Kissinger now. He’s a canny politician, that’s all.
I’m certainly not disagreeing with that! Fair nuff, his timing is impeccable, I was just doubting that these comments will further any career moves; which you’re not arguing anyways.

there is one way of winning , wipe of the population and start from scratch

Blair also said the war was a big mistake. It seems like the only people that still think it was a good idea or could be won are in the white house.
Um, I highly doubt Blair has made any such admission. One of his junior cabinet ministers, Margaret Hodge who works for the DTI, is reported to have called the Iraq war Blair’s “big mistake in foreign affairs” at a private dinner. And Jack Straw has called the situation “dire”.

You’re not going to get such a frank admission of failure from Blair.

Is that the young, savvy-looking Democrat chap? UK citizen here.


Yeah, Barack Obama (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama).

He impresses me, and I generally don't like the democrats at all.

But his middle name is "Hussein," and you better believe that will impact his election chances. No one likes to admit it will, but it will.

I’m certainly not disagreeing with that! Fair nuff, his timing is impeccable, I was just doubting that these comments will further any career moves; which you’re not arguing anyways.

Hmm yes. They may or may not work towards that goal, but I think as always that is his goal.

Like a lot of people who are jumping ship from the Bush administration's stance. Most of them I consider are not doing it from a real change of heart, but just to salvage political ammo. Bush is definitely becoming the scapegoat - not to say he isn't responsible, as President during this whole debacle he certainly is, but politically speaking all that's necessary for the GOP to save face is to isolate him and then in 2008 when he's gone, move on as normal.

I guess I'm on a tangent here tho.

Bush is gonna have to face the truth that his ship is sinking when it comes to the Iraq war. You have too be pretty deluded to believe this war is going good.

Yeah, Barack Obama (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama).

He impresses me, and I generally don't like the democrats at all.

But his middle name is "Hussein," and you better believe that will impact his election chances. No one likes to admit it will, but it will.

I can see it now "Barrack Hussein Obama," wrong on middle names, wrong for America.

good. the more people who think that the better.

He impresses me, and I generally don’t like the democrats at all.
Yeah, he made a big impression on me when I saw him on the news here in the UK, and he was only on for two minutes. He seemed very polished, relaxed, confident. You could almost forgive him for being a politician...

Like a lot of people who are jumping ship from the Bush administration’s stance. Most of them I consider are not doing it from a real change of heart, but just to salvage political ammo. Bush is definitely becoming the scapegoat–not to say he isn’t responsible, as President during this whole debacle he certainly is, but politically speaking all that’s necessary for the GOP to save face is to isolate him and then in 2008 when he’s gone, move on as normal.
Can they actually do that? From this side of the pond, the GOP seemed, a still does seem, pretty damn confident in the President and the Iraq war. Wouldn’t the Dem’s be able to point to Rep. Senators’ voting histories? Or is the party not as behind the war as is portrayed?

I guess I’m on a tangent here tho.
Ahh, but who doesn’t like (near)hijacking a thread?

*flies the thread to Syria at gunpoint*

Blair also said the war was a big mistake. It seems like the only people that still think it was a good idea or could be won are in the white house.

I think you'll find that the Blair spin machine is calling that a slip of the tongue...

Can they actually do that? From this side of the pond, the GOP seemed, a still does seem, pretty damn confident in the President and the Iraq war. Wouldn’t the Dem’s be able to point to Rep. Senators’ voting histories? Or is the party not as behind the war as is portrayed?

Yes, maybe, and no it isn't.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15773983/

Right now it looks mostly like individuals instead of official policy changes, but I think this signals just exactly that move.

And think that even the Democrats supported the war, their turning against it was the start. GOP is going to have to if it wants to grab the "center" which is now apparently against the war.

The reality of course is again, its just about grabbing votes. The democrats aren't going to leave Iraq IMO. Neither will a Bush-out GOP. The game here will be who can more effectively blame the other side for the failure. The ones trying to make it look like a non-failure are gonna be a minority soon enough.


Ahh, but who doesn’t like (near)hijacking a thread?

*flies the thread to Syria at gunpoint*

THREAD TERR'RIST!

I think you’ll find that the Blair spin machine is calling that a slip of the tongue...
Or at least downplaying the statement (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,1951267,00.html)

It took 3 years to realise this?

Bloody hell...

Some people are slow learners. ;)

Bush is gonna have to face the truth that his ship is sinking when it comes to the Iraq war. You have too be pretty deluded to believe this war is going good.

Wanna bet? When asked what lesson about Iraq he might learn from the history of Vietnam, Bush, in Vietnam, said that the lesson of Vietnam was, "We won't lose if we don't give up." He might just be deluded enough.

When Kissinger admits it, it's all over.

Victory is not around the corner, it has never been around the corner, and it will never be around the corner. Continuing this war is nothing more than a waste of lives and money.

Look, that makes it pretty much every last one (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,436607,00.html) of the foreign policy greats* the US has had.

Why isn't Bush on the phone with Ahmadinejad begging for help?

*And love him or hate him, Kissinger was a player of international diplomacy the like of which doesn't come around that often. And I admire every proponent of realpolitik, because they're so rare these days.

Man, they're all coming out of the woodwork to disown Bush now that he's a complete lame duck.
What next? Barbara Bush going on TV and saying GWB is her least favourite child?

Man, they're all coming out of the woodwork to disown Bush now that he's a complete lame duck.

Isn't it beautiful?

Isn't it beautiful?
I must admit I'm not above getting a certain amount of petty satisfaction over it.

I can see it now "Barrack Hussein Obama," wrong on middle names, wrong for America.

"In 1998, the American Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya was bombed by Arab terrorists. Barak HUSSEIN Obama's father was born in Kenya. Coincidence?

Obama-- do we really know anything about him, other than his father named him after the 'Butcher of Baghdad'?"

It'll be something like that, with plenty of pictures of Saddam, bin Laden, and random carnage. :rolleyes:

Man, they're all coming out of the woodwork to disown Bush now that he's a complete lame duck.
What next? Barbara Bush going on TV and saying GWB is her least favourite child?

I'd pay to see that.

To be brutally honest, I wouldn't trust Kissinger to speak my weight. This moron screwed up US foreign policy every day he was in office, and clearly hasn't learned anything since.