.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Born at the Crest of the Empire

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Picture of the Day














I'm sure he'll soon say something to make me regret it, but Joe Biden gets a cool picture for saying this at the debate:

“Rudy Giuliani doesn’t know what the heck he’s talking about” on immigration and sanctuary cities. “He’s the most uninformed person on American foreign policy now running for president.”

(A Biden campaign handout photo from Ramadi, Sept. 6./Reuters)

posted by mikevotes at 4:06 AM

11 Comments:

  • Biden visits Iraq every few months and has done so since the beginning (or nearly so) of the war.

    By Blogger -epm, at 10:42 PM  

  • I don't doubt that at all. Biden is a charming, very smart guy. He just has this thing about being in love with himself that tends to get in the way of his talents.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 8:46 AM  

  • I'm neither a Biden supporter nor detractor. I just wanted to point out that, unlike the biggest blowhards in the beltway, I think he's probably the most grounded and informed about the situation in Iraq.

    I know some find him to be a bit of a wind-bag and full of himself, but I don't see it that much. In fact I think he's been restrained in puffing up his visits to Iraq and the fact his son will soon be deployed there.

    Now Rudy G. on the other hand.....

    By Blogger -epm, at 10:52 AM  

  • I've just fallen under the Biden charm before and been burned.

    (And I agree that he's very informed on Iraq (most informed?) but I sincerely disagree with his partition plan.)

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 1:50 PM  

  • I think his partition plan is insidious....what don't you like about it?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:17 PM  

  • Longer answer than I have time for. Short version is that it creates the worst fear for every sect.

    Kurdish independence, PKK/Turkey/Iran, Shia/Iranian control of the oil and export through Basra, Shia militias within short missile distance of Saudi oilfields and agitating cross border, Sunni safe haven that will likely be used in a proxy against Shia/Iran. Need for unaccountable Sunni groups/Al Qaeda for that agitation.

    You would have constant trading of fire in Baghdad and other mixed areas.

    It doesn't really resolve anything except giveing the US a plan.

    Plus, No Iraqis want it.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 3:04 PM  

  • Didn't the break-up of Yugoslavia facilitate peace? Save lives? Do you support an independent Kosovo, or should it remain part of Serbia?

    What's the problem with a partitioned Iraq? Is it just a concern that we don't want it to be another foreign imposed nation-construction?

    It's my understanding Iraq is becoming partitioned anyway, but violently and chaotically. Wouldn't it be wiser to diplomatically work toward an autonomously partitioned Iraq, rather then the forced national unity crap we're now dealing with?

    I really don't know enough about this to have an opinion I can defend. Just a lot of questions.

    By Blogger -epm, at 3:14 PM  

  • EPM, I don't think that's an accurate direct parallel because by the time of the partition, the country had already been completely cleansed. There were no mixed areas left.

    Plus, there wasn't the same regional influence/interference as well as the complicating factors of both the regional Sunni/Shia conflict and the complication of terrorism.

    The official split of the parts of Serbia was more a recognition of what had already taken place, the sides had largely fought themselves out or at least to a stalemate, and there was a fairly clear dividing line.

    Plus, there really weren't any major outside elements trying to use the conflict for their own ends.

    Plus, beyond the longer term problems I've listed above, the Sunnis and Shia DON'T WANT IT, and there's no mechanism by which the US could impose this.

    (The two answers I see are either a Shia strongman with an interest in balancing US/Iranian interests, or a constant managed balance between the Sunni and Shia factions.

    Or you just slowly pull out, and let Iran manage and win the civil war.

    Frankly, if you recognize some sort of partition, that's what your likely to get anyhow.)

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 4:33 PM  

  • I think weakening Iraq was the objective all along. The Iraqis may not like it but I don't see what they can do about it. And no it won't solve any underlying problems...it will create new ones to justify the US staying in the region.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:52 PM  

  • Well, it would give the opportunity to play the three sides against each other to see who wants the US protection more.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 6:23 PM  

  • Sure....they could keep that game going indefinitely.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:53 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home