Israel model for Iraq, says Bush

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Unless something has changed fundamentally over there in recent months - he seems to be understating quite significantly the sectarian/tribal divisions in that country which are at the root of the unrest.

It also sounds like he's come off his "nothing but absolute victor at any cost" mantra. Given that the Israelis are a single unified people, I think comparisons to Israel are premature at best...

US President George W Bush has appealed for people to give his strategy in Iraq a chance - holding up Israel as a model for defining success there.

He said America would like to see Iraq function as a democracy while dealing with violence - just as Israel does. Speaking at the US Naval War College, Mr Bush said success in Iraq would not be defined by an end to attacks.

His remarks come as members of his Republican party are increasingly turning against the war in Iraq. The US president characterised the war in Iraq as primarily against al-Qaeda forces and their use of "headline-grabbing" suicide attacks and car bombings.

He said: "Our success in Iraq must not be measured by the enemy's ability to get a car bombing in the evening news."

The terms of success set out by Mr Bush included "the rise of a government that can protect its people, deliver basic services for all its citizens and function as a democracy even amid violence". Mr Bush suggested Israel as a standard to work towards.

"In places like Israel, terrorists have taken innocent human life for years in suicide attacks. "The difference is that Israel is a functioning democracy and it's not prevented from carrying out its responsibilities. And that's a good indicator of success that we're looking for in Iraq."

'Well-conceived plan'

In December US President George W Bush announced the deployment of a total of 21,500 extra troops in Iraq.

In early March Defence Secretary Robert Gates approved a request for an extra 2,200 military police to support the security drive in Baghdad. Mr Bush asked officials and the public for patience to allow his strategy to work, thus giving Iraq's leaders time to achieve political reconciliation.

"It's a well-conceived plan by smart military people. And we owe them the time, and we owe them the support they need to succeed," he said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6251982.stm

Edited June 29, 2007 by erekose

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Speaking at the US Naval War College, Mr Bush said success in Iraq would not be defined by an end to attacks.

Managing expectations, are we?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Speaking at the US Naval War College, Mr Bush said success in Iraq would not be defined by an end to attacks.

Managing expectations, are we?

So it would seem...

[mawilson 2,133]

It also sounds like he's come off his "nothing but absolute victor at any cost" mantra. Given that the Israelis are a single unified people, I think comparisons to Israel are premature at best...

Well, Israel does have a sizeable Palestinian population (Palestinian citizens of Israel, not the occupied territories.)

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Israel. Woot!!

[sereia 0]

don't say that, you might get your comment deleted, lucky!

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

don't say that, you might get your comment deleted, lucky!

Yeah. The Israel haters might turn me in.

[mawilson 2,133]

don't say that, you might get your comment deleted, lucky!

Yeah. The Israel haters might turn me in.

There's a new "Praise/Report Member" function.

I hate censorship and am going to report all moderators.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It also sounds like he's come off his "nothing but absolute victor at any cost" mantra. Given that the Israelis are a single unified people, I think comparisons to Israel are premature at best...

Well, Israel does have a sizeable Palestinian population (Palestinian citizens of Israel, not the occupied territories.)

I'd say the factional division between Iraqis are rather more volatile.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

More accurate would be Pakistan, which has a raft of groups with some generally dominant (Muslim Punjabis, though not at present--Musharraf is a mohajir) and others who'd either like to be heard (in general, mohajirs would fit here) and others who have scores to settle (Sindhis, many of the Balochs, Shias).

(ironically, the description has only changed marginally after 1971; prior to that, the description "marginalised Muslim Bengali majority" could have been added to it)

[KHURRAM SERAJ 0]

I don't think Pakistan would be the correct example, as There is only 3% Shi'ite in the sunni country while That is the biggest problem in Iraq where you have Majority Shi'ite plus People following different Imams (some are with the Coalation forces and most are against) while the the Sunni's don't have live Imams.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The 'divisions' in Pakistan are mostly borne out of the political ambitions of various factions/leaders - they only masquerade as religious or ethnic problems.

eta: if you want to see the divisions in pakistan vanish, start a war with india. vice versa true as well

Edited June 29, 2007 by Gupt

[KHURRAM SERAJ 0]

The 'divisions' in Pakistan are mostly borne out of the political ambitions of various factions/leaders - they only masquerade as religious or ethnic problems.

eta: if you want to see the divisions in pakistan vanish, start a war with india. vice versa true as well

It's funny how that works, But I think thats everywhere look here after Sept 11

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Look on the Putin thread. Even on VJ left and right come together when the Ruskis try to take the North Pole LOL.