Time-Tested
Zal Khalilzad, in a speech on Tuesday:
Or would such stark, easily understood time frames force the Nascar set to realize how little progress we're actually making?
Low times....
A year ago, terrorism and the insurgency against the Coalition and the Iraqi security forces were the principal sources of instability. Violent sectarianism is now the main challenge. It is imperative for the new Iraqi government to make major progress in dealing with this challenge in the next six months.What is it about "six months" that's made it a go-to catchall on Iraq? Is it an amount of time (a year might seem too long, after all!) that some Beltway focus group test has determined the American public will swallow year after year? If that's the goal, why not put it in more understandable terms for our pop-culture society? Instead of "six months" how about something like "we expect the Iraqi government to curb sectarianism before the Super Bowl." Or, "the time between now and the new season of Paris Hilton's show will be the most important for U.S. foreign policy in a long time." Take it away, Tom Friedman.
Or would such stark, easily understood time frames force the Nascar set to realize how little progress we're actually making?
Low times....
posted by The Cunning Realist at Thursday, July 13, 2006
4 Comments:
Sounds like you are getting despondent. We're not all dunder-heads.
If a major withdrawl of troops with 30,000 remaining in a few fully operational bases marks the end of the game, what inning would you say we're in at this time?
No extra innings allowed.
Wonderful.
The prime minister has no army, no proper police, and if he says something the occuping forces don't like they make him back off, publicly.
Also the foreign forces do not have to obey any laws, and so can do what they damn please, like killing and rapeing, etc. One of their benefits of having to serve there.
So with this premise he is supposed to run the country and stop the violence.
I wonder if in my own town, the mayor would be successful under these conditions.
If you are honest, no country can have a civil society and rule of law under those conditions, not even here in the US.
This is what I found googling the phrase:
The Time Is (Perpetually) Now
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Ever since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the coming months have always been crucial and critical:
"You only have about the next six months."
Sen. Joseph Biden Jr. (D-Del.), Nov. 21, 2005
"We've got, I think, six months."
Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), Nov. 17, 2005
"This is a critical time in Iraq."
National security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, Nov. 10, 2005
"We are entering a make-or-break six-month period."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), Oct. 26, 2005
"The developments over the next several months will be critical."
Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus, Oct. 5, 2005
"The next months will be critical."
U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton, Aug. 4, 2005
"I think the next 18 months are crucial."
Retired Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, July 18, 2005
"I think the next nine months are critical."
U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad, June 29, 2005
"I will say unequivocally today that what the administration does in these next few days will decide the outcome of Iraq."
Kerry, Jan. 30, 2005
"The next few months will be critical."
Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), July 22, 2004
"Iraq now faces a critical moment."
President Bush, May 24, 2004
"The next six to seven months are critical."
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Dec. 1, 2003
"The next three-to-six months will be critical."
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Sept. 10, 2003
"We may be going through a series of weeks and months that are crucial."
Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), July 10, 2003
"I think the next few months will be crucial."
Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), July 3, 2003
-- Dana Milbank
Sorry for the long post, you can't make that stuff up.
Post a Comment
<< Home