http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/23/us.al.maliki/index.html

Maliki already spanked Hillary for her comments since that was written, and France's foreign minister has offered an apology.

And Hillary and France's foreign minister had what exactly to do with the story linked? I reread the story several times and am missing whatever you are alluding to, Akipt.

The story does make a valid point, with regard to the disappointing results of democratic elections being held in middle eastern countries, and the subsequent manner with which the U.S. has responded. It shows that the same process used in America of buying votes can work just as well in Egypt, Lebanon or any other country in the region.

Sour grapes is not unique to any particular culture, or political system.

I must say I remain amused at the "blame Iraq" angle we've had people taking as of late. Yeah, let's get some MBA clowns to make up benchmarks, then get mad when they don't meet them. What do they think al-Maliki is trying to do, run a Quizno's franchise? Every political group in that country has agendas that are only congruent with ours when they want our money to carve a bigger piece of the quagmire pie we made.

Hillary, as well as a number of other leaders including Bush's appointed ambassador to Iraq, suggested that al-Maliki can't handle the job as the countries various sects get further and further divided and he should be replaced. Akipt disregarded the bulk of the story and just focused on the fact that Hillary Clinton, and not the majority of this country's leadership on all sides of the isle, feel that he is doing a poor job despite being democratically elected.

As I said Byl, "since that was written..."

Here's a more up to date article, including the hopeful political progress:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq27aug27,0,4626909.story?coll=la-home-center

"At a hastily called news conference after meeting with other Iraqi leaders, Maliki dismissed the calls for him to step down as "ugly interference" in Iraq's domestic affairs.

He trained his angriest words on Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York and her fellow Democrat, Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan.

"There are American officials who consider Iraq as if it were one of their villages, for example Hillary Clinton and Carl Levin," he told reporters. "They should come to their senses."

Akipt disregarded the bulk of the story and just focused on the fact that Hillary Clinton, and not the majority of this country's leadership on all sides of the isle, feel that he is doing a poor job despite being democratically elected. As usual, you hear what you want to hear. Unless you got a better replacement for al-Maliki, I suggest we leave their govt the fuck alone and let them sort it out. Hell, they've accomplished more the past year than our congress has.

What did I not hear Akipt? It wasn't me that made this all about Hillary Clinton and not the majority of the leadership that have been making note of his poor performance. I've personally never criticized him, I personally know nothing of his performance, and I personally haven't asked for his removal. But it isn't about what I hear, or about what I've thought of their performance either. Its about you making the story all about Hillary for no reason other than you've got a condition and can't help yourself.

Well, that is a nice job of deflection, but Maliki's initial "we will look elsewhere for friends" speech was in direct response to George Bush's expression of "frustration with the Iraqi government." George Bush took his bitch slapping and the next day call Maliki a "good man with a tough job." George's reward was Maliki mentioning by name some of Bush's political opponent's by name for expressing the same things that George was expressing to provide cover.

From the article you posted
It was the second outburst in recent days from the beleaguered leader
Second is the key word there.

Also from the article you posted
On Sunday, he drew fresh criticism from two influential Republican senators.
If Maliki's comments weren't meant as a bone for George, why did he mention two Democrats that last made news weeks ago with criticism of Iraq, instead of the more recent rumblings?

It really is a simple game, try to keep up.

Two GOP Senators make a majority now? :p


And there's a slight difference between "hey, is it really smart to be taking a vacation" and "we need to replace you with someone else." At least the French guy understood when he crossed the line.

why did he mention two Democrats that last made news weeks ago with criticism of Iraq, instead of the more recent rumblings? Last Wednesday does not make "weeks ago."

Well, that is a nice job of deflection, but Maliki's initial "we will look elsewhere for friends" speech was in direct response to George Bush's expression of "frustration with the Iraqi government." George Bush took his bitch slapping and the next day call Maliki a "good man with a tough job."

It's great there is no power so third rate they still can't call out our President and win.