Jordan's Blog

Jordan,
Since pipe dreams are in order here, try this one on for size. Bush and Israel are close because we give tons of $$$$ to Israel who in turn spend it with our defense contractors (putting $$$ in the pockets of Bush campaign conributors) so as Israel's mentor is about to leave office with not one postitive thing for his legacy, they start a war and wait for Bush to broker a peace accord which might in someones wild imagination provide a legacy that makes up for all his short coming, atrocities, broken laws and constitutional abuses.
Be sure to let me know if Bush does not broker a "historic lasting peace accord in last days of his administration". You will do that of course, lol.

Hope it doesn't make you mad if it happens.

OH, sorry, didnt mean to hijack your blog on another subject.. just cant stand the koolaid drinkers and there conspiracy theories.... so, I thought I would throw one out there!

The last peace effort that worked in the Mid-East was brokered by Jimmy Carter and took Egypt out of the battle for Israel. I'm sure our friends on the right will deny this, but the fact is, Egypt has honored the blockade of Gaza and is no friend of the Arab Brotherhood as represented by Hamas. Improving the image of the Likud party before the upcoming Israeli elections likely has more to due with this war than any concern over Bush's image. Not to mention the fact that the Israelis were getting tired of the constant rocket attacks from Gaza. I may be wrong, but I don't think Bush can bring any pressure to bear on Hamas, since he basically refuses to talk to Iran and Syria (Hamas' source for rockets and funds).

Pakistan an ally?

First US has always had an up and down relationship with both Pakistan and India. Second. I would hardly call them an ally. They supported the Taliban and have aided Al-Qeada. And supposedly they are helping Osama stay hidden in their northwest region where they have little authority.

Musharaff is/was a military dictator who took power by force. US did not initialy support him. Not until after 9-11.

How nice of the US to back a terrorist all of a sudden.

Jordan:

Your foreign policy analysis is on the money! We have not kept our eye on the board and it is a constantly changing game. Hindsight is always 20/20.

But I feel you are off your mark on the original post. Using Blagojevich's behavior as a standard for all Democrats is as fair as using Larry Craig as a standard for all Republicans. Sometimes politicians (from both parties) go off the rails.

Democrats gambled that he wouldn't appoint anyone. They thought they could wait until he resigned or was impeached and then the Lt. Gov. could make the appointment. Boy were they ever wrong. Now they have a real mess on their hands.

On the political side they may have won a small victory. The other option besides waiting was to have a new election...which would have certainly been won by the Republicans. If the Gov. had waited they would have a Democratic Senator. Since he didn't, they can now threaten to fight the appointment, be told by a court that they have to accept the appointment, scream to the media about how much they object...but they still have a Democrat in the Senate.

It's not pretty, morally questionable and undeniably seamy. Sounds like Chicago politics to me.

The real question will be if the new Jr. Senator from Illinois can win his primary, much less the general during the next election.

BTW: Just because I voted for Obama doesn't make me a Democrat. All parties have good & bad members. You are now getting to watch politics "jump the shark". Thanks Gov. Blagojevich.

First US has always had an up and down relationship with both Pakistan and India. Second. I would hardly call them an ally. They supported the Taliban and have aided Al-Qeada. And supposedly they are helping Osama stay hidden in their northwest region where they have little authority.-kchotrod

I am so glad you made that statement does anyone remeber back in the summer of 08 when Mrs Bush assigned 10 mil to Afghanistan shortly after there was a prison break. The Taliban reformulated even stronger, so who financed who for what reasons? "Global Human Sacrifice" mission. Yeah, "Mission Accompolished" for the NWO, war of the worlds.

mannsmaniac, if her idea of sending a check for 10 mil to Afghanistan would not have occured the terrorist would not have had the money to reformulate. In a interview she claims to continue supporting the "wives" in Afghanistan through funding. Money can trickle down in other countries to militants. Take a look at the case of the Muslim charity that sent money to Hamas militants via the US. A little mind is one that believes all that money went to the right people. Insinuate, just look at the timing and the chain of events, maybe history would speak louder.