Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Bush and the Neocon's 'Surge' to Nowhere

By Robert Dreyfuss, Tomdispatch.com. Posted January 6, 2007.


Bush is still the Christian-crusader President, still lodged inside a bubble universe filled with neocon advisors -- and that means more troops in Iraq, even if the idea doesn't make a lick of sense.
010607story
Bush and the Neocon's 'Surge' to Nowhere

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Robert Dreyfuss

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Every now and then, you have to take a lesson or two from history. In the case of George Bush's Iraq, here's one: No matter what the President announces in his "new way forward" speech on Iraq next week -- including belated calls for "sacrifice" from the man whose answer to 9/11 was to urge Americans to surge into Disney World -- it won't work. Nothing our President suggests in relation to Iraq, in fact, will have a ghost of a chance of success. Worse than that, whatever it turns out to be, it is essentially guaranteed to make matters worse.

Repetition, after all, is most of what knowledge adds up to, and the Bush administration has been repetitively consistent in its Iraqi -- and larger Middle Eastern -- policies. Whatever it touches (or perhaps the better word would be "smashes") turns to dross. Iraq is now dross -- and Saddam Hussein was such a remarkably hard act to follow badly that this is no small accomplishment.

A striking but largely unexplored aspect of Saddam Hussein's execution is illustrative. His trial was basically run out of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad; Saddam was held at Camp Cropper, the U.S. prison near Baghdad International Airport. He was delivered to the Iraqi government for hanging in a U.S. helicopter (as his body would be flown back to his home village in a U.S. helicopter).

Now, let's add a few more facts into the mix. Among Iraqi Shiites, no individual has been viewed as more of an enemy by the Bush administration than the radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. American troops fought bloody battles with his Mahdi Army in 2004, destroying significant parts of the old city of Najaf in the process. American forces make periodic, destructive raids into the vast Baghdad slum and Sadrist stronghold of Sadr City to take out his followers and recently killed one of his top aides in a raid in Najaf. The upcoming Presidential "surge" into Baghdad is, reputedly, in part to be aimed at suppressing his militia, which a recent Pentagon report described as "the main threat to stability in Iraq."

Nonetheless at the crucial moment in the execution what did some of the Interior Ministry guards do? They chanted: "Muqtada! Muqtada! Muqtada!" In all press reports, this has been described as a "taunting" of Saddam (and assumedly of Iraqi Sunnis more generally). But it could as easily be described as the purest mockery of George W. Bush and everything he's done in the country. If, in such a relatively controlled setting, the Americans couldn't stop Saddam's execution from being "infiltrated" by al-Sadr's followers -- who are also, of course, part of Prime Minister Maliki's government -- what can they possibly do in the chaos of Baghdad? How can a few more thousands of U.S. troops be expected to keep them, or Badr Brigade militiamen out of the streets, no less the police, the military, and various ministries?

Consider the "new way forward," then, just another part of the Bush administration's endless bubbleworld. And check out exactly what madness to look forward to in next week's presidential address via Robert Dreyfuss, a shrewd reporter and the author of the indispensable Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam. -- Tomdispatch.com editor Tom Engelhardt

The Surge to Nowhere

Traveling the Planet Neocon Road to Baghdad (Again)

By Robert Dreyfuss

Like some neocon Wizard of Oz, in building expectations for the 2007 version of his "Strategy for Victory" in Iraq, President Bush is promising far more than he can deliver. It is now nearly two months since he fired Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, installing Robert Gates in his place, and the White House revealed that a full-scale review of America's failed policy in Iraq was underway. Last week, having spent months -- if, in fact, the New York Times is correct that the review began late in the summer -- consulting with generals, politicians, State Department and CIA bureaucrats, and Pentagon planners, Bush emerged from yet another powwow to tell waiting reporters: "We've got more consultation to do until I talk to the country about the plan."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: neocons, bush, iraq, surge

Robert Dreyfuss is the author of Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam. He covers national security for Rolling Stone and writes frequently for The American Prospect, Mother Jones, and the Nation. He is also a regular contributor to TomPaine.com, the Huffington Post, Tomdispatch, and other sites, and writes the blog, The Dreyfuss Report, at his website.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
out now
Posted by: rsaxto on Jan 6, 2007 2:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bushies have such a talent for making things worse in all sectors that it is downright scary. Surge is the worst thing they could do so of course it is the thing they are pushing. Withdrawal is the best thing they could do so of course they will fight tooth and nail and American deaths piled on top of Iraqi deaths against withdrawal. It is a classic case of criminal minds making criminal mistakes. The best thing for America and for Iraq that Bush/Cheney could do would be to resign so of course that is the last thing they would ever think of doing. Mess of potamia it is and will remain because the Bushies are stuck in an idiot rut.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» CRUSADER-RACIST Bush Posted by: citizenjoe
» RE: CRUSADER-RACIST Bush Posted by: alterstate
» Yes inferior races. Posted by: citizenjoe
» RE: out now Posted by: fearlessmanateehunter
Ooh, hello sailor
Posted by: HeroesAll on Jan 6, 2007 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is just the sort of treatment that the stupid Bush junta ideas deserve.

"I think the debate is really coming down to: Surge large. Surge small. Surge short. Surge longer. I think the smart money would say that the range of options is fairly narrow." (Donnelly, of course, forgot: Surge out.)

Magnificent. Inarguable. Priceless.

"Of all the ‘surge' options out there, short ones are the most dangerous," he wrote in the Washington Post last week, adding lasciviously, "The size of the surge matters as much as the length. … The only ‘surge' option that makes sense is both long and large."

Ooh -- that is, indeed, a manly surge.


Game, set, and match. The whole article is justified by this reposte. And I think that, in all seriousness, there is a very phallic context to what's going on here. The Los Bush Boys want to feel that they're strong and manly, and can beat any contender. Never mind that they're contesting via proxy. Never mind that the odds are heavily in their favour, in terms of firepower (rather like an entire rugby team tackling a toddler). Never mind that they've already inflicted massive damage. They want to have their way with the world.

If only one could convince them to get a little psychotherapy to deal with their inadequacies. Perhaps they could be introduced to the world of strap-ons and rubber goods. Perhaps they could learn to love crochet. Perhaps they could learn that men aren't valued solely for the size of their dicks.

Or perhaps, at the very least, they could put their very own dicks on the line. Demonstrate their own prowess. Fight their own battles.

Can't you just see the grudge match: the Krauthammer vs al Sadr Graeco-Roman wrestling. Oil up, boys, and get grappling...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Let's look at the record, shall we? Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» Where the oil is: Posted by: rwa
» RE: Ooh, hello sailor Posted by: Edward George
» RE: Ooh, hello sailor Posted by: ISlamIslam
Bush the Gambler: "All In"
Posted by: Roy Eidelson on Jan 6, 2007 4:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Immediately after the 9/11 attacks, President Bush sat down to play poker with the biggest stack of chips at the table, the odds-on favorite to win one of the highest-stakes games ever played. This huge initial chip advantage was built from a unified and supportive citizenry at home, a mainstream media that rarely questioned his judgment or intentions, an international community prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt, and a military machine bigger than the next couple dozen countries combined. But since those early heady days, Bush and his close advisers and neocon allies have made one horrendous decision after another. The great tragedy, of course, is that the president has not only been playing with his own chips. Rather, in this game his poor play has cost the lives of our courageous soldiers and many Iraqi civilians, our country's stature in the world, and our national resources desperately needed for other purposes, domestic and international.

Others, realizing how poorly they've been playing, would recognize that they don't belong at the table—or at least conclude that they had entered the wrong game. Not so with the president. Rather, all signs suggest that this stubborn poker player is unlikely to learn any constructive lessons from his abysmal performance. There are at least five reasons why this is so. First, although a relative novice at the game, he has refused to prepare adequately, hasn't mastered the likelihood of various outcomes, and seemingly hasn't even tried to understand his opponents and their style of play. Second, he has cultivated and embraced an Old West saloon mentality where a loaded six-shooter and a quick draw can turn losing hands into winners. Third, he has a personal history of being bailed out whenever he has come up short in the past, whether through family connections or the highest reaches of our judicial system. Fourth, he has convinced himself that God is personally by his side, presumably with an unlimited supply of aces. And fifth, he is now concerned about his legacy, and likely suspects that only a miraculously successful reshaping of Iraq and the Middle East can save him from being a frequent answer in "worst president ever" debates in the decades ahead.

My list is undoubtedly incomplete, but it is daunting. It suggests that Bush will ultimately be driven to go "all in" regardless of any wiser counsel he might receive. And at the very least, "all in" means continuing to play the Iraq hands as he has done thus far--or perhaps with even greater recklessness and abandon. More frightening still, "all in" may mean saving his very last stack of chips for Iran. As a new year begins, we should all be asking whether anyone can pull him away from the table before it is (again) too late.

P.S. As an addendum, the appeals Bush and his supporters will use in defense of their actions are predictable. I describe some of them in detail in an online video entitled "Dangerous Ideas: How Conservatives Exploit Our Five Core Concerns" that can be viewed HERE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bush the Gambler: "All In" Posted by: Mamarianne
Somebody, somewhere...
Posted by: fsquared on Jan 6, 2007 5:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
stop this surge idea in its tracks. There is NO MILITARY solution to the Iraq mess...well...short of obliterating the whole country, anyway. Is our Iraq policy so "advanced" that it can't follow lesson 101 about repeating history?

Signed...
Frustrated from within the machine

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Drang nach Osten - the Drive to the East Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: A simpler vision. Posted by: Edward George
» RE: A simpler vision. Posted by: sheena2u
What is our final expectations in Iraq
Posted by: kencohen on Jan 6, 2007 5:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I currently understand Bush's expections, he refuses to accept the fact that he made an horrific mistake in his impetuous, reckless, urgent, unilateral and pre-emptive invation of Iraq. Now that the Iraq war is the centerpiece of his legacy as president (he has done nothing else that would distinguish his accomplishments in office), he wishes to have history see that he made a brilliant decision despite all the naysayers and doubters. Bush envision a strong, centrally governed Iraq, friendly to the US and our interests (including permanent military bases) and western oriented in values and economic development (especially partnering with US oil producers). Iraq was to become the "western" wedge that rids the area of tribal and theocratic rule.
To date, Mr. Bush has steadfastly denied that just the opposite reality is emerging in Iraq. The local tribal sects are fighting (and winning) for their own power and autonomy, the Sunni/Shiia/ Kurd divisions are reshaping the politics and real estate in the region. al Sadr has emerged as a dominant political and military figure. He is allied with Iran and is clearly anti US. The Saddam execution gave us a clear view of the reality in Baghdad.
So, what are 20,000 more troops expected to accomplish in a city and country aleady fractured, divided and chaotic. How are we to train Iraqis whose loyalities do not envision a united, strong central government that blends all of the tribal and religious factions into one democratically ruling entity? Instead, their loyalties remain to their local religious and tribal leaders. Our training and equipping these Iraqis simply gives them greater weapons and fighting skills to perpetuate their civil war.
Remember the Tet offensive in Viet Nam? We were in the same boat. Our mission was lost, our army tired and demoralized and our expectations of what we wanted Viet Nam to look like was turning into the opposite reality. Yet we could not yet let go of the belief that military force will get us what we want. It didn't then and will not now!
Our strategy in Iraq needs to correct the series of blunders and mis steps taken at evey turning point, realize that we failed to appreciate the history of the area and the strength of local culture. We need to engage with Iraq's neighbors. give up our xenophobic reactions to Muslim cultures and respect that western democracy is seen as Christian occupation that offends the basic fabric of the middle eastern consciousness.
I see no awareness in the Bush administration that the American People do not buy his beliefs that what happens on the streets of Baghdad will determine the destiny of the war on terror or protect our national security. We do not see that our efforts and sacrifices have been welcomed or appreciated by the Iraqi people and we see no emerging new world order in the area to promises hope and stability.
In good conscience, we can no longer ask of our sons and daughers to risk their lives and limbs to engage in a misguided effort with no clear mission or meaningful outcome. The "surge" is simply another spin on "staying the course".
It is time our leadership took a cold sober view of the geopolitical reality in the middle east and at least stop the further hemorrhaging and erosion of our standing and influence in the region. The correction of the mess Bush has created will be daunting. We need a surge in diplomatic interventions. aliance builing and thoughtful strategic planning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who benefits from a 'surge'? Part1
Posted by: lclark on Jan 6, 2007 5:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Iraq war has been an example of what our government has become from the onset. Liars and exploiters of both its citizens and other peoples...all in the governments service to multinational financial and corporate interests.

The weapons of mass destruction, the passion for 'democracy', the desire for stability are deceits.

Iraq was an artificially created country that consists of three distinct enthic groups that simply do not like each other: Kurds, Shiite, Sunni. Allowing each to create their own nation with each having a portion of the oil fields would be a more viable solution. But as said, the goals of democracy and stability are working deceits.

So what's really going on?

War costs and national debt as a means of transfering wealth to the privilaged controlling class on the transnational level is no different than 'privitization' and 'public/private patnerships' and new bankruptcy laws and usury rates for credit card rates on the national front.

Since the late 60's the share of Federal taxes paid from the profits of corporations has dropped from 30 + % to single digits, with the taxes shifting to wage earners. Since G Bush 'tax cuts', wage earners are further burdened with taxes and people who generate wealth from investment have their income protected.

Do you pay less taxes now? No. It's a shell game. Rising housing prices found other levels of government hustling to reevaluate the value of housing and raise those taxes. Now that the housing bubble has burst and prices are dropping you will not see the same fervent interest to lower assessments. At the same time, business interests are given property tax breaks as incentives, as though retail stores and the like would actually avoid establishing themselves in a location if they did not receive these reductions. The fact is that at the onset of this country property ownership and income were coincident. These were the shop owners and famers and the tax was based on the fact these properties generated wealth for their owners, not simply shelter.

Want to solve social security shortfalls? Remove the cap so the superwealthy pay in proportionally. What is Bush proposing as an alternative? Adding in illegal workers from Mexico. He does not want to 'fix' social security, he wants to break it and the borders of America as well.

The Iraq war is about getting control of physical resources - oil - as the value of the dollar evaporates. The Bush administration has also been intent on getting Iraq's assests such as utilities turned over to multinational corporate control. They have even expended energy ensuring the farmers of Iraq are required to buy their seed from corporate entities.

In the U.S. we see the same sell off of what was once public infastructure to multinational corporations, everything from 'public' water supplies to toll roads...and more of this is coming to the U.S. at a rapid rate. And illegal immigration is simply a variation on this theme of providing cheap labor and wage suppresion in this country, as well as eroding the concept of national sovreignty as the multinational goals of creating a 'north american union' is persued.

Take a look around and you will notice how once regulated businesses such as utilities are now foreign owned, and the costs of basic services is rising rapidly while the service is degrading.

Our 'representatives' from both major parties use slogans as they persue the interests of multinational corporations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who benefits from a 'surge'? Part2
Posted by: lclark on Jan 6, 2007 5:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take issues like dependence on oil and pollution. Both could be addressed without exotic future technologies. Electric cars have been viable for 30 years, and most middle class American families use a 2nd car primarily for commuting. A combination of electric cars and the generation of electricity through the mass deployment of wind turbines would address a significant part of the dependence on imported oil directly.

Why do we not see these sorts of straightfoward solutions persued? Auto manufacturers would earn less money on engines that are simpler and generate less after purchase profits. Oil corporations would see profits reduced as well as their control over populations and governments. Instead we see bogus solutions such as hybrids that increase basic transporation and repair costs. A purchaser of a hybrid will pay more for the car than they will save in rising fuel costs, will have higher maintenance costs, and less trade in value as the batteries will have aged.

Insteads of solutions that benefit citizens or people of this planet in general, you see wars and loss of personal choice, erosion of the constitution, promotion of fear, governmental control of more areas of individuals.........we've lost the vision that created the constitution (both in rights and the persuit of the common good) and now have a burdensome government that insists it has the authority to compel people to do all sorts of intrusive acts from wearing seat belts when they drive to drugging their children with Ritalin if they are in public schools.

If you take a broad perspective who may begin to see how gross the methods and goals of people who craft our laws and create national policy have become.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who benefits from a 'surge'? Posted by: VannaLaRoche
The surge attempts to "secure" Iraq- FOR THE NUKING OF IRAN
Posted by: xbj on Jan 6, 2007 5:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I keep saying it, these suicidal moron Warpigs are hell bent on nuking Iran, and they ARE GOING TO DO IT.

The buildup of ships in the Gulf (as well as a ill-advised Canadian vessel that has a false-flag Israeli bulls-eye painted right on it [Israel masquerades as Iran and sinks the ship]), the mobilization of every possible troop to Iraq to hold down the inevitable Shia REVOLUTION once Iran is nuked... what more do you need to know what they're up to?

IT COULDN'T BE MORE OBVIOUS than if they announced it.

Problem is, EVEN IF THEY DID, people wouldn't believe it, because IT WOULD BE SO SUICIDAL.

Just to oil prices and the resulting economy ALONE, not to mention what China and Russia WILL ABSOLUTELY DO to retaliate, protect THEIR oil interests in Iran, and MAKE GOOD ON THEIR MUTUAL PROTECTION PACTS they have signed LONG AGO with Iran.

These desperate, UTTERLY INSANE, Hitler-in-his-bunker assholes think that the only way to "reunite" the country behind them and their Nazi agenda is to BRING THE ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD DOWN UPON AMERICA.

Yep, that will unite us all right... in one huge slag heap of NUKED BLACK GLASS, AFTER killer Tsunami on both coasts have washed every major coastal city out to sea.

Could anyone possibly be any more asinine? There just isn't a word suitable to describe how unbelievably stupid these Nazi Warpigs are.

Just no word. In English anyway. I'm sure there's one in Farsi though. And probably in Mandarin as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No Way Out Of The Quagmire
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jan 6, 2007 5:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Iraq has done to the United States what Afghansistan did to the Soviet Union. The damage that a murderous, half-witted little dirt bag named George W. Bush did to his once-great country will be deep and long lasting - we're talkin' gererations here, kiddies! The next twenty-five years will be remembered as the time where America re-defined itself. Part of that redefinition will be shutting down the military industrial complex that has decimated America's treasure and turned the world into a powderkeg. Another part will be returning to the vision of America as articulated by Abraham Lincoln on the fields of Gettysburg one somber afternoon one-hundred and forty-three years ago: "...government of the people, by the people, for the people..." We're doomed otherwise. Father Abraham's vision is, indeed, in serious danger of perishing from the earth.

The war is over. We lost it. Anyone not smart enought to figure this out (Bush and Cheney, for example) are not thinking rationally. For purely political reasons, Dubya is going to try like hell to keep this obscentiy going until January of 2008 when he'll be able to hand it over to the next (read: Democratic) administration to lose. The 110th Congress must take matters in their own hands and end it NOW. As the excellent piece above makes clear, Saddam was a hard act to follow and yet, somehow the First Fool has managed to do it! Poll after poll after embarrassing poll has shown that the majority of the Iraqi people are actually nostalgic for the regime of Saddam Hussein!

Remember his son, Uday? Sure the kid had a bit of a mean streak! Sure he was a homicidal little thug but -you know what they say, don'cha? "Boys will be boys"! Ha! Ha! Ha! The fact that Saddam and both of his sons are now viewed as martyrs is just too funny for words.

As has been said before by people a hell of alot smarter than I, this war is lost. Truth be told, "winning" it, was never even a vague possibility.

Don't pray for American victory in Iraq. Pray for God's will. Pray for peace.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No Way Out Of The Quagmire Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: No we won Posted by: Edward George
» RE: No Way Out Of The Quagmire Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: No Way Out Of The Quagmire Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: No Way Out Of The Quagmire Posted by: sheena2u
Let's give the terrorists what they want...
Posted by: Carl Street on Jan 6, 2007 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Only idiots think terrorists are a threat to them. The truth is they are ONLY a threat to our so-called leaders. And, then only because these jerks have profited by raping other countires to make a buck.

Only a fool would put his A$$ on the line to save George Bush and his corporate friends from what they deserve. The easy way out of this is just round up all those jerks and send them to the "terrorists" to do with them whatever they want.

The minute we did that gas would drop down to 30 cents a gallon and the world would look upon us as heroes!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Insurgent Crackdown Pipedream
Posted by: cynyk on Jan 6, 2007 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This morning the wire services report that al-Maliki plans to launch a crackdown on Bagdad insurgents, particularly the forces of Moqtada al-Sadr. But the fact is that al-Sadr's forces have so infiltrated the Iraqi army and police forces, they are a virtual extension of the Mehdi Army. That leaves the Americans to enforce the crackdown. How would you like to be the American soldiers entering Sadr City knowing that you're likely to get shot from both sides - the insurgents and your supposed Iraqi soldier allies?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where's the Dough?
Posted by: edith on Jan 6, 2007 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The surge of course will result in more destruction and more pollution in Iraq. And Bush is expected to ask for BILLIONS more in "reconstruction" aid for Iraq as part of the surge plan to "stabilize" Iraq. This includes billions for public works prorgrams to hire unemployed Iraqis(unemployed because of the US-unleashed war!).

Not one penny for the surge. As for the billions, we've spent hundreds of billions on "reconstruction" already, and the electric power in Iraq still is spotty. No more money for "reconstruction" until all US troops and facilities are out and dismantled.

No more money for reconstruction until a neutral third party auditor decides where the already spent money went and what needs to be done to bring all of Iraq back into the modern age, not just the Oz-like Green Zone where the US regents reign.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where's the Dough? Posted by: sheena2u
Why?
Posted by: paschn on Jan 6, 2007 6:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why do the US sheeple continue to write about that murdering bastard as though some great mistake was made?
Like it's really not his fault, or character flaw,... or he's just too stupid for the job?
Dammit,.... can you not see evil when it murders your sons and daughters??
When it gathers like maggots on dying flesh to devour what death hasn't taken??
Republicans/neocons have sold your lives out to big business. And it wasn't an "accident",...bad luck or a mistake. Fools,.. it's done intentionally to make money on the backs and blood of YOU AND YOURS!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cut of the funds
Posted by: Democritus on Jan 6, 2007 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The funds appropriated last October for Iraq are sufficient to get our troops out swiftly and safely. It's time for Congress to get some guts and cut off more funding for the war. That's the way the Vietnam war ended. Kagan's "surge strategy" is an attempt to use funds already appropriated to send more troops to die. The Kagan claque in Iraq (there are two others) needs to be confronted with reality and then confined to the dustbin of history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some surging thoughts. . .
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jan 6, 2007 6:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Surge"; what a descriptive word. That's what you get when you flush a toilet – which is pretty much where the Bush administraton finds itself in Iraq. Also keep in mind that for every surge, there is a backflow; and for us, that backflow will be flag-draped coffins.

On one side, there are the Sunnis, supported by Saudi Arabia. If the slaughter of their brothers in Iraq escalates, how long will our sweetheart deal for Saudi oil hold out? On the other side, there are the Shiites. They are already being supported by Iraq. If we decide to bomb their nuclear facilities (assuming we can even find them), there is a probability that a good portion of their enormous ground forces will invade Iraq in support of their brothers and to drive us out. We could very quickly find our already overtaxed 140,000 soldiers overwhelmed, or even held hostage. Then what? Nuclear war? This thing could escalate out of control so easily it is positively frightening.

Having Bush as Commander-In-Chief is like giving a hand grenade to a three-year-old. How long will it be until his stupid, reckless adventures really "pull the pin" over there?

The only surge I want to see now is a surge of good sense and courage from Congress to pay attention to the surge of public opposition to the Iraq occupation and impeach the First Idiot and his puppeteer Cheney. Before that pin drops to the floor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Some surging thoughts. . . Posted by: sheena2u
Can't we all just SING ALONG...
Posted by: cheneybush2008 on Jan 6, 2007 6:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(as sung to
You IS A Human Animal)...

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Botch elections, you blame Bush,
Not your flaming leftist push,
For jobs without some work
Which you can't heed.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Whether Fonda or George Lucas,
You'd prefer Saddam had nuked us,
Instead of ending any threat you
couldn't see.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Burn the flag, steal a pill,
You'll abort more children still
than the UN or EU will ever need.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Whether gay or TV hack,
or just a hoe on mostly crack,
There's nothing you won't do to
not succeed.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Shrill and strident, you'll be true,
To all the things with which you've screwed,
FICA, unions, schools, and Medicrap indeed.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Young or old, smart or tanned,
Oh Canada thinks you're still grand,
Though Vermont is where you'll make your
final stand.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Uncle Teddy, Cousin Lerch,
Any pardon selling perch,
Be better than the nation you
besmirch.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
When you speak, forests cry,
Booboo Boxer lets them fry,
Never mind the fuzzy critters that
all die.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
To the center Hillary runs,
Never mind you don't like guns,
That never stopped you once from
Shrieking MORE SEX WITH NUNS.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Diss the troops, hit a cop,
As long as cable you don't drop,
To watch the latest MeetUp numbers
bleed.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Jezze Jaxson, Martin Sheen,
There's no time for Listerine,
But boiling smelly Birkenstocks is
keen.

You IS A Huffie Liberal,
You IS A Very Special Breed,
Suckled on the teet of state,
Your mantra daily MASTERBATE,
As cure for all ills foreign and
ob