"The catastrophe in Iraq, the scope of which is now apparent to even the most disengaged observer, and his mishandling of the Dubai port issue have sent President George W. Bush's public approval ratings to the lowest of his presidency. According to a Reuters poll, only 34 percent of Americans believe he is doing a good job overall. Only 30 percent, less than a third, think he is managing the Iraq situation well. A remarkable 72 percent of American troops polled in Iraq think the U.S. should leave Iraq within the next year.
(Edit: this can be intuited that majority of soldiers believe they are in a FUBAR war, this is what happened in Nam, and is a confirmation the war is lost. I have suggested the irrational , incompetent, insensitive, with the megalomania of an evil Texan Padron, that sees the world as his ranch and the life on it his cattle to be branded Ranch U.S.A, just like as when he headed Hekk Week at Skull abd Crossbones he BRANDED the initiates with a red hot cattle iron that one can NOT in any way assume he well not proceed on castsatrophic course. If he ordered the invasion in Iran the U.S. would a humiliating unless Bush himself went to nuclear weapons. Until proven otherwise i will proceed on the basis we have the most incompetent dictatorial and dangerous POTUS in U.S. history and this is a man that still thinks he is doing gawd's will, and things are going badly only because gawd is testing his faith. Impeachment can only stop this lunatic, imo.otraque)
Nor is there any hope for Bush on the horizon. The bloody events in Iraq have undermined American authority in that country and in the Middle East more generally. The Shiite clergy of Iran and Iraq have bolstered their own authority at Bush's expense. This development has already severely limited his scope of action in Iran, and will doubtless have many other negative consequences in the months and years ahead.
Tactically, strategically and politically Bush now finds himself in the worst of all possible worlds. With Americans increasingly fed up with the Iraq debacle, he needs to start drawing down troops soon, but he can't do it while the country teeters on the brink of civil war. If civil war does break out, a U.S. withdrawal will look even more like cutting and running -- under these circumstances, not even Karl Rove will be able to figure out a way to get away with simply declaring victory and going home. Yet if American troops stay, they have no good options either. . ."
i agree fully with Borchgrave, that being, the damage done now can far exceed Nam. i got to search SI and find where i stated before decision to invade, that to invade would be equal to or in fact the worst decision in the history of the human race.
But they lamented how it had been wasted on Iraq, instead of being carefully nurtured for what could be far more threatening crises in the same neighborhood before 2010.
Here they speak only of a nuclear crisis. Why was Iran targeted before it became a nuclear threat?
A quick perusal of Brzezinski’s chessboard will confirm that the United States is indeed following his game plan. We have taken over Ukraine, attempted to take over Azerbaijan as witnessed in their recent election, but failed, we have pulled off a revolution in Kyrgyzstan and attempted a takeover in Uzbekistan. We have a candidate in waiting in Kazakhstan. My point is we are playing his game. The game rules were published in 1997. Before Iran became a nuclear threat Iran was targeted. Brzezinski states we must keep China from controlling the oil or gas. A more recent development tells of a second phase in the Iran-China strategic energy cooperation which will involve constructing a pipeline in Iran to take oil some 386 kilometers to the Caspian Sea, there to link up with the planned pipeline from China into Kazakhstan. It is more imperative than ever that we stop Iran according to the Chessboard. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/GL21Ad01.html
The Grand Chessboard – 1997 Brzezinski sets the tone for his strategy by describing Russia and China as the two most important countries - almost but not quite superpowers - whose interests that might threaten the U.S. in Central Asia. Of the two, Brzezinski considers Russia to be the more serious threat. Both nations border Central Asia. In a lesser context he describes the Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Iran and Kazakhstan as essential "lesser" nations that must be managed by the U.S. as buffers or counterweights to Russian and Chinese moves to control the oil, gas and minerals of the Central Asian Republics (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan). http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:wDuUmiut7n8J:www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/zbig.html+Brzezi....
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
