The really worrying thing about Bush's end-of-office comments is that his speeches are written by White House bureaucrats.Dubbya hasnt a brain in his head to say anything and now it seems there are people behind the scenes who arent much better and who are making enough problems for the new President and his people to undo.
How are they going to do it?What can they say to undo the harm Bush is doing?
Besides calling the man an idiot in the wrong place?But the world already knows that!What else can be said and done to mend fences?
Dunno...and I dont think anyone coming after Bush does either.
It is a worry.

socratease

Many thanks, Dr Mcqueen, at last our Online is again having a comment from an academic, one practised from an area whose job it is to find out where the real problems in today's Middle East do lie.

Certainly George W' has made things much worse through his Iraq intrusion now over five years ago - his close mates Blair and Howard now out of the picture.

Many of our commentators would do well to remember that our universities are part of a democratic system and not of an autocratic regime.

Certainly most of the concern is about our group's support for not only illegal actions such as the occupation of Iraq, but also the deliberate eye-shutting and mind-shutting about letting little Israel go militarily nuclear, virtually doing the job in the Middle East of what a true Kantian-style global UN should be doing.

"Little Israel going nuclear" may well be the only thing that saves it from its neigbours.

I'm surprised a "Post-Doctoral Fellow" doesn't know the difference between "bazaar" and "bizarre".

Am I missing something or are academics supposed to be immume from having to look at positives before they write their negative opinion pieces?

All indications are that violence in Iraq has abated to the point where commerce and an economy is actually starting to work, the elected, elected mind you, government is starting to find some coherence, where idiots like al qaeda and that mad mardi army mufti are utterly defeated, where Iran and Syria are now actually stopping insurgents sneaking into Iraq, where US Generals are saying positive things and are actually talking serious troop reduction, where the Iraqi army actually does as directed by the Iraqi Government, and probably more importantly and significantly where the Western media and commentators are no longer finding negatives except of course the outdated and generalised patently false and misleading statements such as:
'However, with the stalling of the initiative in Iraq ...' ie 'the active spreading or promotion of democracy throughout the Middle East'

Did this academic miss the peaceful, mind you peaceful, endorsement of a President in Lebanon?
Did this academic miss the start of peace settlement talks between Syria and Israel?
Did this academic miss the change in political effort and outlook in Syria?

Why did this academic have to colour his opinion in good 'ole George Bush hatred and all the negatives he could find?

Oh and has he in his coccoon of denial and hatred missed the subtle change in the treatment of an undefeated and defiant Hamas, the elected Government of the Palestinians.

Jeez there are a list of incredible changes underway in the mid east but this academic chooses only to focus on all the outdated negatives.

Why, doesn't he want George's legacy to include even his initiating of the now evolving peace processes?

How bloody miserable!

Keith, I am wondering where you are getting your information. Even in the U.S. the Bush approval rating is down to 28%, the lowest rating of a President in our history. Apart from the outrageous profits that Bush has been able to attain for his oil buddies, he has little to hang his hat on. He has no understanding of history and little appreciation of other cultures.

Pleasingly it is people like KEITH in OLO who can see through the fraudulent, antiquarian, and full of hatred contentions of Dr. MacQueen against the Bush administration. MacQueen in parading all the past negatives he deliberately misses and does not acknowledge the present positives that have issued since the new Bush strategy of the Surge implemented by the capable and savant-general Petraeus. The chances are that these positives will serve as the foundation stone upon which a democratic Iraq could arise and in turn would serve as an example for the rest of the people of the Middle East to imitate.

As I predicted in a paper of mine on December 2006, the year 2007 would be the Annus Mirabilis for Bush, in regards to Iraq.

http://kotzabasis1.wordpress.com

Joe

'Few of us are sears in our own lifetime'

I have no doubt most people in the US, if they could, wouldn't vote for George. Recall he only won just under half the popular vote at his last election so he's only recently become unpopular with about half his previous supporters. The fact people can't vote for him, depending on the sampling methodology, probably skews that figure.

My point was not George's popularity but about how he may have set the Middle East on a course for modernisation and peace.

If Iraq turns into a functioning democracy, Israel contracts or a single state solution emerges, Syria adopts a more open dialogue, Lebanon again finds peace in it's diversity, Saudia Arabia ... well who cares? ... and Iran's mullahs finally concede they can't control the westernisation of their Persian heritage, coupled with the need for oil being replaced by the newer electrical, battery and solar technologies how will history view George and his Invasion of Iraq?

Joe in Australia we've just had an election. The winner was a fool who championed withdrawal from Iraq. Australians highly value our connections with the US (Regardless of who is president) so the fool, to ensure he would be seen as maintaining that special relationship with, committed unconditionally and indefinitely our troops to the Afghanistan quagmire.

We've only had casualties in Afghanistan.

My view Iraq will reach a peaceful existance and a participatory democracy while we will still have troops fighting and dying in Afghanistan. A place which has had intractable divisions, warlords and violence for many centuries. And we are stuck there now too.

Where would you prefer our (Australian) committment to be made? I for one would prefer Iraq. Don't cop out by saying neither cos that just won't happen ... now.

I do read on line the the NYTimes and the Washington Post. I watch CNN and Fox on satellite pay tv. I'm not ignorant of the positions and attitudes of the people in the greatest power and liberal democratic country the world has ever seen.

Kind regards

Very interesting comments from the avid followers of The Great Iraq Awakening so far, yet nothing so far is mentioned about a future for Iran.

As a trained historian, one is waiting for futher comments with interest?

Cheers - BB, WA.

It is interesting that five years ago, Paul Bremer appeared to have ideas about what could be happening in Iraq right now.

And even though there were suggestions even from some of our contributors that much of the so-called terrorism in Iraq was not from AL Quida but from Saddam's quarter million top brass military force turned into insurgents.

As the Sunnis have long been branded two-timers different than the Shias, questions also came about why Paul Bremer had not offered to put Saddam's Sunni front-liners on the US pay-roll?

As good historians have also the mental capacity to equate on the opposite side - though without favour - the same historians might believe that if it is just the proven Sunni-two timerism that has fuelled the so-called Great Awakening, most historical academics might easily point out similar historical cases that have failed miserably.

Cheers, BB.

What planet are you living on Keith?

Planet Realism, Bernie.

Due to the corruption, incompetence and outright felonious mindset of the members of the fbi/cia, all of the other intel arms of the USA government are unable to protect the country from the mounting threats by persons and countries who seek to stop this nation's assault on Humanity. The reason for the national intel failure, therefore , can be directly attributable to the fbi/cia and their foolish congressional and presidential Handlers. I have learned that the following intel groups study my material sometime in an apparent effort to comprehend why the fbi would attempt to frame (or neutralize) one of their own:

fbi ( this group of thugs ostensibly operates under doj, but in reality the fbi is the boss);
cia- this group is a nation unto itself, operating completely independently of the US governmnet;;

homeland security (responsible for many threats and assaults on my person)has an intel office manned by special agents and others who analyze data;
dea has an intel office for national security matters, but dea is largely controlled by fbi/cia; dea also pretends to function under the authority of doj;

the dept of defense is top dog in military intel, but they too take orders (or to put it mildly, "requests" from the fbi/cia)-within this dod group are army, air force, navy, marines (their respective intel offices);also under the dod banner are the dia, nsa, nro (national recon office), and the national geospacial intel office (Note that this office has extensively analysed my sites and for this reason I came to learn of their existence as a highly specialized tech office coordinating data both from earth and space);

The US Department of State has its own office of intel which regularly reviews my material to determine whether I may be a candidate for a federal arrest warrant;The US depts of energy and treasury also each visit my sites in connection with their appraisals of finances, etc., in connection with my material and visits thereto.

The various intel groups have their own subgroups which also carry out mission oriented objectives globally.

One of the most perplexing things to happen on the world stage in recent years was the re-election of Bush.

How……… on…………Earth……did……. that…….. happen ?? ?? ?? ??

I still find myself agape, wide-eyed, blinking heavily, with and uncontrollable sideways head shudder, every time I think about it (:~0

Your third paragraph Keith contains six 'ifs'. Do you see any progress towards any of them, in light of the past 7 years?

You appear to believe Iraq's democratic election is significant. It's as if i) Iraqis knew who the candidates were; ii) they knew what policies they represented; and iii) the elected government could actually pass laws, budgets, maintain rule of law etc. It is the most legitimate puppet government we've ever seen.

It has been shown if you watch CNN and/or Fox you will have more misconceptions of what's happening in Iraq than if you watch no news at all.

Bennie, it was the Washington Post two years ago which disclosed the beginnings of the Iraq Great Awakening, when a group of Shias were about to arrest a small number of known Sunni insurgents.

Next thing one of the patrolling US gunships dropped down and arrested the Shias rather than the Sunnis.

Apparently the reporter who filmed the unusual turnabout US action must have got into a lot of trouble, because nothing was heard for months after that till the flick-spins of the Great Awakening.

For Keith

and Iran’s Mullahs finally concede they can’t control the Westernisation of their Persian heritage

Keith, the above piece taken from your rhetoric about beneficial change for the Middle East generally, we regard as a philosophical jewel because it is also the argument from most academic historians, including myself.

Your significant statement about Iranian folklore and Westernisation proves you as a natural historical scholar, knowing that such Westernisation is not so much related to our West, but to Hellenistic Reasoning, Alexander the Great having passed it on to what we might now call the former Middle East intelligentsia, comprising Persia and the whole Euphrates, as well as Egypt, where the followers of Alexander dedicated the Great Library to one who had been a pupil of Aristotle.

A place where all were welcome, including not only Jews but also where the boy Jesus possibly met the Men of Wisdom while with his mother in Egypt.

It is also deeply felt among many university Liberalists, that hundreds of years later when Islam under Mahomet took over the Middle East, Hellenistic scientific reasoning was not crushed by order of Mahomet, but even passed on to the barbarian West later by Muslim scholars.

Indeed, it is said that as the Germanic barbarian West intellectually profitted by such, so the angry Mullahs possibly pushed the Muslims down into their own Dark Ages, very likely not a commitment sanctioned by Mahomet.

Finally, it is also so interesting, Keith, that last year an Iranian female judge stated that eventually Iran will find its own liberalization using its own history just as you have mentioned.

Best of Regards - BB, WA.

Thank you BB, WA.

Numbers mate, numbers are the signpost to the future and an indication of the all our past. And that bloody includes zero.

How many others will understand the significances contained in those two sentences.

I'm chuffed, I've not matriculated, yet you call me not just a natural historian, but by God, a scholar.

My mum will be playing her harp with gusto.

The only point, in addition, I'd discuss would be the effect of the Arab after the collapse of the Caliphates and the restoration of fundamentalist Islam and it's return from old Persia to Saudia Arabia in about 1100.

One other minor point too, sorry, we must not forget the West also adopted significant attitudes from the Hebrew ... but not to the extent the Christian fundamentalists seem, by their spruiking, to think.

I think you rather succinctly setout the roots of the development of Westernism.

You know I don't think enough people today understand how we have come to be where we are. The debate in this forum on language this month was quite a revelation. I love to see a few articles discussing the influence of our (Western) origins and developments on how we determine our style of life today.

I haven't the expertise nor the time but I think the time for such discussion is opportune.

Thanks, Keith, but please remember though we might agree on history, I do not agree that peace in this world can be obtained by US missile diplomacy as it was never really obtained by British gunboat diplomacy.

Cheers, BB

Keith, I read your comments with interest. You see utopia for Iraq while I see a dark cloud of chaos. The many "if's" that you foresee would be wonderful but I would have to be on "cloud nine" to expect hardly any of these dreams to be fulfilled. You explained where you get your news and while it is commendable that you are "informed", I agree with bennie's comment that "....If you watch CNN and/or Fox you will have more misconceptions of what's happening in Iraq than if you watch no news at all". In fact, many of us in the U.S. consider Fox News as being merely an extension of the spin of the Bush White House on the news. If MSNBC is available, it would be a far more balanced source of news than either of those that you listed.

The Iraq war is the second longest war in our country's history (second only to Vietnam) and the second most expensive, being second to World War II so far. By some, the estimate has been put at 3 trillion if all factors are considered. In the meantime, the U.S. infrastruction is deteriorating and we have around 40 million citizens who have no medical insurance while the costs of medical treatment is soaring. There are better ways to spend our limited resources. Our economy has been severely affected by this war that was initiated by misinforming and deceiving our people. (A new book by McClennan, a former Bush Press Secretary, has just been released that details what many of us already knew. It details the Bush "Culture of Deception). I don't need to go into more but the Bush legacy can only be one of complete failure. After 7 years in Iraq, democracy and a stable government is little closer than it was when the invasion began.

Keith, I read your comments with interest. You see utopia for Iraq while I see a dark cloud of chaos. The many "if's" that you foresee would be wonderful but I would have to be on "cloud nine" to expect hardly any of these dreams to be fulfilled. You explained where you get your news and while it is commendable that you are "informed", I agree with bennie's comment that "....If you watch CNN and/or Fox you will have more misconceptions of what's happening in Iraq than if you watch no news at all". In fact, many of us in the U.S. consider Fox News as being merely an extension of the Bush White House spin on the news. If MSNBC is available, it would be a far more balanced source of news than either of those that you listed.

The Iraq war is the second longest war in our country's history (second only to Vietnam) and the second most expensive, being second to World War II so far. By some, the estimate has been put at 3 trillion if all factors are considered. In the meantime, the U.S. infrastruction is deteriorating and we have around 40 million citizens who have no medical insurance while the costs of medical treatment is soaring. There are better ways to spend our limited resources. Our economy has been severely affected by this war that was initiated by misinforming and deceiving our people. (A new book by McClennan, a former Bush Press Secretary, has just been released that details what many of us already knew. It details the Bush "Culture of Deception). I don't need to go into more but the Bush legacy can only be one of complete failure. After 7 years in Iraq, democracy and a stable government is little closer than it was when the invasion began.

Hi Joe

"....If you watch CNN and/or Fox you will have more misconceptions of what's happening in Iraq than if you watch no news at all"

The ultimate implication is if I don't watch any news I'll be imformed best? :-)

Or is it that you think I should only watch news or read news that shares anti US, anti peace in Iraq and anti peace in the mid east views?

Media in Australia only ever runs that angle and is full of such propaganda. I source all possible views and make up my own mind.

Other sources I access are al Jazzera, Haartz South China Morning Post and other publications.

Have you noted the past month in Iraq has seen almost no violence and US troop numbers are at 150,000 or only 20,000 more than when 'the surge begun'?
It appears the US is now winning the peace too... arn't you proud of your countrymens efforts?
Have you noticed Israel and Syria have opened peace talks?
Have you noticed Lebanon has elected it's President and violence has decreased?
Have you noticed how overt Israeli agression against Palestinian Gaza has ceased? Dare to wonder why?
Have you noticed the only blot on a general move to peace in the region is the (Announced Sunday 1st June) Israeli government's auction of more stolen Palestianian lands. The auction is closed to all but Israeli Jews. Ever dare wonder why?

We in Australia treat with disdain the bleatings of disgruntled, money-seeking former employees ... why don't you do the same. It's commonsense really.

The Bush legacy like the Reagan legacy, like the Clibnton legacy won't be evident nor accepted for about a generation. Then the critic's will all go quite.

I've always admired the US in the way it assesses the longterm legacies of it's political leaders. Especially those like MacCarthy, the Kennedys, Nixon, Carter, Johnson and Ford ... and most of their wives. Indeed you blokes are doing that with Hillary at the moment.

Hope my comments aren't offensive to you and are taken in a spirit of openness, frankness and friendship.

Go for it, American Joe, you are dead square on subject target.

like to hear much more from you.

Best Regards - BB, West Australia

The suppositions in this thread that the Sermon on the Mount is Jewish philosophy, can be countermanded by historical research regarding the Great Library of Alexandria where it is said that over half of the students who attended were of Jewish faith.

It is also believed that the so-called Wise Men mentioned in the New Testament said to have influenced the boy Jesus, could have been Jews who had learnt much about Hellenistic Reasoning.

It has even been suggested that because the Sermon on the Mount is based on Reason rather than the thou shalts of Biblical Faith, such might have been similar to the meditations of Socrates?

Regards - BB, West Aus'.

"The ultimate implication is if I don't watch any news I'll be imformed best? :-)"

Fair point Keith. I did take a bit of licence there. What I should've said was CNN and Fox are measurably unreliable when it comes to objectivity, and that you'd get a better picture of the state of affairs by watching ANY other MSM channel, or better still a newspaper. It needn't be left wing, only reputable