Obama had secret mideast report ??

mossbacked · #1 02-17-2011, 11:16 AM

As soon as he comes under fire for his waffling reactions during the early stages of the revolt in Egypt . . . the new release is that he'd already anticipated it ???

What should we make of this? Should we conclude this is why he acted as he did?

The New York Times

"WASHINGTON — President Obama ordered his advisers last August to produce a secret report on unrest in the Arab world, which concluded that without sweeping political changes, countries from Bahrain to Yemen were ripe for popular revolt, administration officials said Wednesday.

Mr. Obama's order, known as a Presidential Study Directive, identified likely flashpoints, most notably Egypt, and solicited proposals for how the administration could push for political change in countries with autocratic rulers who are also valuable allies of the United States, these officials said."

finnbow · #2 02-17-2011, 12:34 PM

Excellent. It seems then that he was on top of his game. Maybe that's why it only took him a couple of days to get on the right side of history in Egypt, as opposed to several years for Reagan the Perfect to get on the right side of history during the Phillipine insurrection to overthrow Marcos.

Do I understand your post as a compliment to Obama's foreign policy prowess, mossbacked? If not, perhaps it should be.

Fast_Eddie · #3 02-17-2011, 12:39 PM

How would you have reacted? We've been propping the guy up for decades. There was no guarantee he would go down. So if you come out and say "Mubarak has to go" and then he doesn't, we're in tough shape. Or, if you come out an unequivocally support the guy, and he does go down, whoever comes in is pissed.

We'll find out in the coming months or years that the U.S. Military played a big role in this through their personal and professional connections with members of the Egyptian military. I'm sure of that. I think Obama and his administration played this one really well, and I am pretty sure the guys who are leading this transition are feeling pretty friendly to the U.S. How it plays out over time is another thing. We'll all just have to sit back and wait. But so far they've done a very good job in a very delicate and tricky situation. They've managed it with precision rather than a baseball bat- something the previous administration wasn't so great at.

BlueStreak · #4 02-17-2011, 12:45 PM

Yeah, so what?

Dave

piece-itpete · #5 02-17-2011, 12:53 PM

Obama came out VERY wishy-washy in public. You'd think if he had prepared for it, he would've prepared how to handle the public aspect as well.

It appears the inept Bush has started something after all

Pete

Zeke · #6 02-17-2011, 01:04 PM

It doesn't surprise me that there was a study/plan of some sort: contingencies are the nature of the business.

Heck, I'd bet -- somewhere -- there's a "plan" for invading Canada...

finnbow · #7 02-17-2011, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Obama came out VERY wishy-washy in public. You'd think if he had prepared for it, he would've prepared how to handle the public aspect as well.

True enough, but he had to walk that fine line that Eddie described. At this point, we have the benefit of a couple of weeks of hindsight. It seems he may have played the cards he was dealt pretty well after all.

As for Dubya starting this ball rolling, I'm not so sure. In fact, the Iraq War is proof positive that you can't install democracy at the barrel of a gun.

Contrast Obama's actions with those of Bush the Elder, who fomented a Shia uprising by the marsh Arabs around Basra in 1991 and failed to support them once they heeded his call. Saddam killed tens of thousands and drained their life-sustaining marshes while Bush twiddled his thumbs.

mossbacked · #8 02-17-2011, 01:11 PM

I was not referring to Reagan, Bush 1 or Bush 2 as someone above tossed in to the mix, but that does cause me to think about them a bit.

In my opinion, being on the "right side of history" really doesn't make a lot of sense to me. There have been quite a few periods in history dominated by truly evil men who killed millions and millions of their own. Being on their "side" did not make you "right".

Moving back to Bush 2, I certainly did not have the same feelings of uneasiness I have today. He had some warts, but I'm convinced the middle east would not look the way it does today if he were presiding during the same sequence of events.

I am just baffled that this report was magically released. It seems contrived, almost as if its being ordered to be produced back in August never really happened. Why announce it at all, and specifically at this point in time?

Oh well, just one man's opinion.

finnbow · #9 02-17-2011, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossbacked

Moving back to Bush 2, I certainly did not have the same feelings of uneasiness I have today. He had some warts, but I'm convinced the middle east would not look the way it does today if he were presiding during the same sequence of events.

I shudder to think what it would look like with Cheney and Rumsfeld running the show. They took mismanagement/malfeasance to new heights in the first several years of the Iraq War and this isn't just my opinion. There are numerous well-sourced books that describe, in excruciating detail, the fundamental incompetence of that pair.

Zeke · #10 02-17-2011, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mossbacked

It seems contrived, almost as if its being ordered to be produced back in August never really happened.

Of course it happened.

As I said, I'm sure there's a plan for invading Canada -- or AZ when those fruitcakes get too uppity -- that either was immediately reviewed or posthaste generated under Presidential Order of a new guy.

I bet such reviews are standard undertakings.