IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Newt's always been more complicated than most.
He's a very smart man. He's been on speaking tours [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/11/AR2005051101846.html|with Hillary on health care] and don't forget that he worked with Bill on many issues before they had their "shutdown" battle.

He's not the cartoon that many tried to make him in to, but he's not given up politics, either.

Gingrich was on Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board. He told [link|http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3660761/|Newsweek] in December 2003:

Sitting in his office in downtown Washington, Gingrich searched on his computer for the Web site of the Coalition Provisional Authority, set up in Baghdad to oversee the reconstruction and democratization of Iraq. \ufffdI\ufffdm told over there that CPA stands for \ufffdCan\ufffdt Produce Anything\ufffd,\ufffd says Gingrich. \ufffdHome page of the New Iraq,\ufffd he quotes. Then: \ufffdThe opening quote is, of course, by [CPA chief Paul] Bremer. Next quote is by Bush. Next quote is by U.S. Ambassador Steve Mann.\ufffd He scrolls down. \ufffdNow this is a big breakthrough. They do have the new Iraqi ambassador to the U.S. On the front page. That is a breakthrough,\ufffd he repeats, adding, sotto voce, \ufffdI have been beating the crap out of them for two weeks on this.\ufffd His basic point: where are the Iraqi faces in the New Iraq? \ufffdAmericans can\ufffdt win in Iraq,\ufffd he says. \ufffdOnly Iraqis can win in Iraq.\ufffd

Gingrich argues that the administration has been putting far too much emphasis on a military solution and slighting the political element. \ufffdThe real key here is not how many enemy do I kill. The real key is how many allies do I grow,\ufffd he says. \ufffdAnd that is a very important metric that they just don\ufffdt get.\ufffd He contends that the civilian-run CPA is fairly isolated and powerless, hunkered down inside its bunker in Baghdad. The military has the money and the daily contact with the locals. But it\ufffds using the same tactics in a guerrilla struggle that led to defeat in Vietnam.

\ufffdThe Army\ufffds reaction to Vietnam was not to think about it,\ufffd he says. Rather than absorb the lessons of counterinsurgency, Gingrich says, the Army adopted \ufffda deliberate strategy of amnesia because people didn\ufffdt want to ever do it again.\ufffd The Army rebuilt a superb fighting force for waging a conventional war. \ufffdI am very proud of what [Operation Iraqi Freedom commander Gen.] Tommy Franks did\ufffdup to the moment of deciding how to transfer power to the Iraqis. Then,\ufffd said Gingrich, \ufffdwe go off a cliff.\ufffd

In essence, the Americans never did transfer power. They disbanded the Iraqi Army and the government, realized that was a mistake, and quickly tried to cobble together an Iraqi police force and military. But the Iraqis in uniform today are seen by too many Iraqi citizens as American collaborators. Gingrich faults the Americans for not quickly establishing some sort of Iraqi government, however imperfect. \ufffdThe idea that we are going to have a corruption-free, pristine, League of Women Voters government in Iraq on Tuesday is beyond naivete,\ufffd he scoffs. \ufffdIt is a self-destructive fantasy.\ufffd (The White House insists that it is paying close attention to local politics and has speeded up the timetable to turn over power to the Iraqis.)

The rumor mill in the Pentagon suggests that Bush\ufffds \ufffdexit strategy\ufffd is to get American troops coming home in waves by next November\ufffds election. Obliquely, Gingrich indicates that would be a huge mistake. The guerrillas cannot be allowed to believe that they only have to outlast the Americans to win. \ufffdThe only exit strategy is victory,\ufffd Gingrich says. But not by brute American force. \ufffdWe are not the enforcers. We are the reinforcers,\ufffd says Gingrich. \ufffdThe distinction between these two words is central to the next year in Iraq.\ufffd Gingrich\ufffds voice rang with his customary certainty. Hard to know if Rumsfeld and Bush are listening.


While one can argue with some of his theses, he's certainly put some thought into them.

FWIW.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Your Google-fu oft astounds
..finding That particular utterance within a noisy sea of 1.666 million 'hits'

Concur that he's no idiot (though his home-life and other ethics appears no better than that of your average manic Aussie CIEIO buying up more news outlets with which to Foxulate without a condom.) Still, manifestly we Are scraping bottoms of barels in search of anyone with an iota of competence in 'Statecraft' ... (author of such a book with that part-title was on Cambridge Forum? recently: a scathing step-by-step litany -- most every piece of which: was omitted by this Admin from 9-12-01 on. It's UGLY when laid out in minimalist Boolean stages - our recent history.)

Maybe, then - his academic training (and of late, Professorship) has reminded him of such early-on debate training as [link|http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html| this sort?] -- quite further nudged along by the fact of the complete shambles made.. by every single decision of the Cheney Cabal, since shortly after the toppling of the Saddam statue.

As mentioned already, the Natl. Attn.Span is increasingly shorter, and if Newt remains fully sentient, he might well become a contender for Something -- surely he wouldn't want to be seen associating Himself with the ludicrous mindsets of the listed jackals assembled there, (to try to devolve some merely callow students into My Gramma - a few years down the road?)
Sad that so few of the audience grokked at-all the significance of the content and That Speaker.. are 'conservative' wannabes really [-]outliers, to This Extent??

Should be interesting to catch his Act II - if anyone catches that: please Do report!
(After all, all it needed for Scrooge's rehab - was some wise prescience about LSD in that fertile mind of Charles, eh?)

New :-)
IIRC, I just googled [link|http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS219US219&q=gingrich+2003+iraq&btnG=Search|"gingrich 2003 iraq"]. It's the 8th hit for me.

Don't misunderstand me. If you look at some of his comments from [link|http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/04/22/gingrich.powell/index.html|April 2003], it looks like he was playing a role as Rumsfeld's hatchet-man in criticizing the State Department. Maybe it's just a difference of emphasis, but I think it's more a case that he wants to be seen as right in history, so he'll change his comments to fit the circumstances when it suits him.

I don't like Newt much, but he's certainly much more of a statesman than Brownback and people in that wing of the Republican party (who are wedded to a weird wing of Christianity). For example, compare their comments on science and evolution: [link|http://discovermagazine.com/2006/oct/discover-interview-newt-gingrich|Gingrich in Discover], [link|http://redstaterabble.blogspot.com/search?q=brownback|Analysis of Brownback's comments at Red State Rabble].

If Newt runs, I don't think it'll be a whole-hearted candidacy. I think he enjoys the spotlight and enjoys being able to talk about issues, but I think he knows he doesn't have a ghost of a chance (given his relationship to Hillary; given that Obama represents the future and he represents the past; etc.).

Cheers,
Scott.
New I almost wonder
if he plans to run for President.

With such a packed field, it's easy to forget how EARLY it is in the game for 08.
New I lot of people think that
I almost wonder
if he plans to run for President.

A lot of people think that he is at least considering it. His very public reentry into the US political scene just as the 08 race is getting started is a rather blatant sign.

He has not really gotten much traction so far though. Fred Thomson has pulled most of the Republican "we don't like the candidates" attention.

In any case I don't think he has a very good chance. He can't possibly stake a position as a Washington outsider, he doesn't have a lot of press charisma, he doesn't have a big personal fortune and his history means he will have great trouble pulling in any moderate.

Newt can be very clever though, and he may be angling for a VP slot. Just about any of the Republican candidates that wants to shore up their support with the Republican core will have to look at him.

Jay
     Newt has epiphany - in public - (Ashton) - (12)
         It must be a joke. - (warmachine) - (1)
             Quite possibly not. - (hnick)
         Newt's always been more complicated than most. - (Another Scott) - (4)
             Your Google-fu oft astounds - (Ashton) - (1)
                 :-) - (Another Scott)
             I almost wonder - (Simon_Jester) - (1)
                 I lot of people think that - (JayMehaffey)
         Wow! The eye of Newt seeing some light. -NT - (a6l6e6x)
         Guess he's not running for president -NT - (andread) - (3)
             Re: Guess he's not running for president - (danreck) - (2)
                 Curse You! Red Bar____ - (Ashton) - (1)
                     Re: Curse You! Red Bar____ - (danreck)

No matter what I accomplish in this life, nobody's going to sculpt my head in thermoplastic resin and make it spit water into the bedrooms of sick children.
46 ms