Looks like AQ is a big fan of the surge.

You are either with the Democrats and 60% of Americans, or you are for the terrorists!

Kevin Drum: the LA Times has finally decided to admit that the surge won't work

Why is the word "admit" used? Had the LA Times previously said that the surge would work? I don't think so.

Ah, Kevin...

Don't you know success when you see it?

Ex-liberal: Yes, they initially supported the surge. If you clicked the link, you'd know that.

The annual report of the Pentagon's Mental Health Advisory Team for the Iraq War found, among other things, that the length and duration of tours of duty in Iraq were starting to cause serious problems:

This report doesn't take any account the capture of a AL-QAEDA top operative by the Bush Administration. I have no doubt that once our troops heard this, the morale of our troops improved greatly resulting in a reversal of any problems you mentioned in the report because they know staying the course in Iraq with the surge caused this capture to happen.

Link
"The Pentagon announced this morning the capture and detention of top al Qaeda leader Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi"
"The CIA caught Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi in late 2006 while he was en route to Iraq, his native country"

Yes, they initially supported the surge. If you clicked the link, you'd know that.

Ex-liberal is apparently posting from his Speak'n Spell, which is permanently tuned to Kevin's blog after an unlikely incident with a fork and some drool.

He's still trying to wrap his mind around the pictures on the teevee, much less clicking the link.

Good post, Kevin. Keep hammering away on Iraq. The madness has got to stop.

Al, you think the troops can't smell the bullshit? It's up to their knees.

If morale is so spiffy and high, why shut down the milblogs, hmmm? Now all updates and posts have to be approved by a commander and they are even restricting soldiers email. How good is that for morale?

Lamest. Fake. Al. Ever.

So lovely to watch ex-liberal have his ass handed to him by Kevin, of all people. It's really a bummer when all your preconceptions and dogma don't match the actual facts, eh ex-lib?

Yeah, that was kind of humiliating ex-lib. Or it would be if neoCON's were capable of feeling shame.

This AP article, Deployed Troops Battle for Child Custody (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PARENTS_AT_WAR?SITE=MIDTF&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT) describes a situation that is, on balance, probably not helping morale.

Hi Kevin,

You missed the other LA Times article - Francis Fukuyama, the neocon's ex-communicated godfather, says "It is no longer a question of if or when the U.S. leaves Iraq, but how."

Regards, Cernig

If Gates had been the SecDef in the early part of the GwB administration, he would have been fired already. That shows how little capital GwB has left.

At Watching Those We Chose one of the lawyers who posts with me over there had a great post this morning about the military and child custody issues for the troops fighting this war.

[Ah, Kevin. Your moderators find me tiresome]

Al at 2:07 is not me pretending to be Al. He really said that.

Al, you think the troops can't smell the bullshit?

Why are you arguing with a parody troll?

Perhaps if you actually served over there we would see this ivory tower sentiment from you.

You - YOU, the trembling chicken hawk egbert, have the audacity to post this? You fucking jackass.

How long until we have a senior administration official telling us that "no one could have anticipated" that multiple extended deployments would lead to higher rates of mental health problems and marital problems?

If this report is true (which I doubt) it proves that we should privatize more day-to-day security activities and allow our troops to do what they do best - destroying the terrorists and and bringing democracy to Iraq.

Kevin,

I suppose to getting around to defending your stupid, lame comment about Sharpton and Imus. Have you finally found a black friend?

I think Al is gone. The current ijuts are either purposeful parodies ridiculing him or lame wingers trying to pull a "Dread Pirate Roberts" name hijack.

BGRS,

That child custody article involving deployed troops is first up over at HuffPo.

Yeah, little FAUX Lib, get your law clerk off your knee and have the poor thing link for you.

mhr, leaving aside for a moment the question of what the US should do about the present carnage in Iraq, can we agree that the present carnage in Iraq was the result of a mistaken right-wing policy?

You are trying to score points against the left on the basis of a disagreement over solutions, when the problem was created by your side.

The longer soldiers are deployed in Iraq, the more often they are deployed to Iraq, they live the fact that nearly everything The President, The Commander in Chief, has said all along is a lie. There was no imminent threat of WMDs, there was no "liberation" of the Iraqi people, The Iraqi security forces are NOT standing up as a national security force.

The only thing we can point to as the truth is that Bush intends to hand this failed attempt at oilfield theft off to the next president to clean up. [We all know his lifelong pattern of needing a clean-up crew.]

Who wouldn't suffer depression, despair and the longterm mental stress and disorders that come with this?

Our leaders owe our men and women in uniform more respect and better/ more responsible decisions. As long as the conservatives are in charge, that simply is not going to happen.

"go home and watch comedy on cable"

No, most liberals do not watch FAUX News on a regular basis.

There was a very fast race horse named Murr the Blurr - Now, mhr, don't know how speedy you are, but, your drivel is very much a blur. Don't know if IUDs or IEDs upset you more.

jcricket said what I was going to say, only more eloquently.

jcricket hit the same points I did yesterday when I ranted about the Pentagon study and the price our military is being asked to pay.

I have been military my whole life and there has always been a little bit of taking the troops for granted. But what we are seeing now is more than I can get my head around. It's repre-fucking-hensible.

"I believe Gates is on a completely different page than President Bush and Gen. Petraeus," said a former senior Defense official who has supported the buildup. "He wants to see some results by summer, and if he doesn't see those results, he seems willing to throw the towel in."

Are you sure that's "completely" different from Petraeus? The source is a "former" senior defense official, who undoubtedly does not know what Petraeus told Bush about "What if the surge doesn't work"?

According to the Iraq War Index of the Brookings Institution, there have been 800 fewer Iraqi violent deaths in the two months since the surge began than there were in the two months immediately prior. Too soon to call that "success", but also too soon to call it "failure".
It's another "corner" turned in the long, winding and uphill battle.

BOOM! jcricket nailed it.

All I can say is Karl Rove must have some really dirty dirt on Robert Gates. Why Gates would accept the job of SecDef under this retarded "Commander guy" and try to pretend this idiotic surge is anything but utter failure heaped upon failure is a mystery to me. I think I would rather eat nails than do that. This man must literally have no shame.

Twelve more US troops killed yesterday.

Sleep very snug and cozy on that "corner" of yours.

I think there is a pretty good consensus that without clear evidence of success by September the American war effort will be reduced and then ended. If Petraeus can not deliver the results, no one coming after him will have the credibility that the had when he took the assignment, testified before Congress, and said that he could succeed. Democrats might succeed in forcing a commitment before that time, but for sure the Republicans will not support the President after that time.

TCD - I know Gates past work very well. Rove doesn't have anything on Gates. The exact inverse is likely true, however. You should go to my place and search the archives for Gates. Perhaps a different picture will emerge. He is one of His Father's Men, sent to save him. Only he didn't have the sense to listen. Gates is the one who can say the things he has said lately - because he is the one man Rove doesn't control.

My two cents.

Well, sure the TROOPS are suffering. But what about President Bush? NO one ever thinks of him. I heard recently someone gave him a purple heart for all the media attacks he has endured.

….there have been 800 fewer Iraqi violent deaths in the two months since the surge began than there were in the two months immediately prior….. MatthewRmarler at 3:36 PM

Pat - Hill Country Gal posted about the Purple Heart. With the appropriate level of outrage and invective, I thought. Some nice photos of the 2004 Republican convention, too. Remember those Purple Heart band-aids? Hill does.

there have been 800 fewer Iraqi violent deaths in the two months since the surge began than there were in the two months immediately prior

It works out that way when you stop counting deaths caused by car bombs...We'll just call that really big number an outlier and redact it from the final report...

To expand on Pat's comment, just last week Laura Bush said that "no one suffers more than the President and I."

Someone should inform the Iraqis and the troops and tell them to suck it up,at least they don't have it as bad as the Bushes.

Why the four-month delay?

There's also the 24% decline in Army behavioral health personnel--the people responsible for dealing with these issues--during the previous year (report pg. 47).

That is beyond embarrassing, especially given what appears to be multiple deployment SOP these days, and its effects on the troops (never mind extended deployments).

The Bushies have utterly failed the acid test of the sincerity of their oft proclaimed desires that they are in it to bring peace and freedom to the Iraqi people: to a person the Bush supporters have never acknowledged their disastrous mistakes in how they went about doing it.

So mhr, and ex-lib and Al and their friends should go back to their holes and not spout this nonsense that the liberals are blocking them on the road to achieving these noble objectives.

I have seen postings on the E-mails I have been getting saying:

Cheney better know as the soldier, marine, sailor, and airman killer.
If the Republicans don’t start to bring home the troops soon they are going to be known as the soldier, marine, sailor, and airman killers. Would you ever use this in your campaign??? Yes or No

FOR:
Dennis Kucinich
Bill Richardson
Hillary Clinton
Joe Biden
Barack Obama
John Edwards
Chris Dodd
Mike Gravel
Harry Reid
Nancy Pelosi


DARREL L. WAKLEY
4986 South 2000 West Lot#29
Rexburg Idaho 83440
208-403-6989
lamar@ida.net

trex: [J]ust last week Laura Bush said that 'no one suffers more than the President and I.'"

Thank God for the miracle of Xanax.

Now, if she could just get her husband to stop moving those goalposts on us ...

Darrel La Mar Wakley: "I have seen postings on the E-mails I have been getting saying ..."

Could it be that even "Randy Weaver Country" is starting to see the Bush administration for what it truly is?

BGRS: It works out that way when you stop counting deaths caused by car bombs

They are still counting deaths caused by car bombs.

Do they yell "god is great" when they stone people to death?

"...I believe Gates is on a completely different page than President Bush and Gen. Petraeus,..."

I wouldn't be surprised that Bush attempted to undermine Gates by creating the "war czar" title. Anyone heard about that again lately?

On soldier's mental health: Wasn't there a survey done a while back that showed a large majority of the soldiers in Iraq believed there was a link between AQ and Saddam? Can you imagine what must be happening with morale over there now since that fiction has been "officially" debunked (most lately by Tenet)?

trex: To expand on Pat's comment, just last week Laura Bush said that "no one suffers more than the President and I."

Gosh, they should take a page from Mama Babs' book and just not worry their "beautiful minds" about it. If it works for that she-devil, it oughta work for them.

Years from now, when our troops are finally out of Iraq and many of them, unable to integrate back into society because of the emotional and mental trauma that they endured as part of their service there, turn to a life on the streets of our cities, will the Republicans support them then? Or will they turn away in disgust, as I see many do now with the homeless Vietnam vets, and just wish those "damn people" would go away?

as long as this is a "roundup", retention in the National Guard is highest among units that have returned from deployment" [and have not been promised that there will be no redeployment.]

http://www.ngb.army.mil/news/archives/2007/04/042307-Recruiting.aspx

They are still counting deaths caused by car bombs. MatthewRmarler at 5:04 PM |

Did you notice, your Guard like mentions

...Bonuses for signing up and staying in have increased significantly. The bonus for non-prior service people, for example, has doubled from $10,000 to $20,000; bonuses for prior-service people and for those who stay in have increased from $5,000 to $15,000; college assistance includes a $20,000 bonus and 100 percent tuition assistance....

Mike -- The administration may not count them, but the Brookings Institution Iraq Index that MatthewRmarler cited does count them (see here, pg 9-17).

"This report doesn't take any account the capture of a AL-QAEDA top operative by the Bush Administration. I have no doubt that once our troops heard this, the morale of our troops improved greatly resulting in a reversal of any problems you mentioned in the report because they know staying the course in Iraq with the surge caused this capture to happen."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

You're too funny. One capture is supposed to turn this all around? Oh, by the way, our soldiers never really have "spread democracy." We overthrew governments in Germany and Japan that had subverted those countries' pre-existing democracies and helped to re-establish democracy in a situation that completely lacked an insurgency against us. Our best example of building a functioning state from scratch is Korea, where we 1) teamed up with people who had betrayed their country by serving the Japanese Imperial army 2) supported strong-man rule for decades 3) were possibly complicit in the killing of innocent students and democracy activists at Kwangju and 4) helped to ensure that Korea did not become a democracy for about 50 years. Our military is not made for "spreading democracy." Our military is made for killing people.

LISTEN UP PEOPLE

The democrats are now in control.

If they pass a funding bill then they are responsable for every American death from that date. Reid says the war is lost so why would they continue it.

They've been waiting for the right Friday to release it. You know, one like another Katrina or something. Time ran out. I can only think that the Dems told 'em "now or we'll force it out."

No suprises there, though. Not anything informed people haven't been saying for a while.

Gates? What do you expect? He came off the Baker commission. He's never actually spent any real amount of time in the bunker.

I see today 2 US troopers were shot dead by a rogue Afghani army member. I'm surprised this hasn't happened already in Iraq. Maybe it has and we haven't been told. The present military hierarchy have no problem with deforming the truth in all manner of ways.

Anyway, that raises the stress level measurably.

I'd like to see someone draw up the actual cost of this war including replacing all the equipment and all the medical bills coming down the pipe for the next 60 years, and the degradation in efficiency due to enlisting a lower level of recruit.

Bring them home!

Haven't been able to post for a couple of hours. Apparently I'm banned again. Never tells me why.

Ithink this sums it up nicely:
In an attempt to increase public support of whatever the fuck it is he thinks he's doing, President Bush trotted out the same old whoop-de-do you've heard over and over at a solemn-yet-resolute speech attended by soldiers, or religious leaders, or firemen, or some mix of ethnic-looking people from one of those countries.

"We have to give this plan time to wop bop a loo bop, a wop bam boom, ah ah ting tang walla walla bing bang," President Bush may as well have said. "May God [help/bless/save] the United States of America."

mhr: "If any country in the world were engaged in a conflict where several factions were blowing up innocent people, including women and children by the hundreds every week with the use of IEDs and of suicide bombers, the compassionate left the world over including liberal Democrats in the US would be clamoring for the US 'to do something.' That is what the left does when the subject of Darfur comes up- 'do something about the slaughter.'"

But we're the country that got those factions to start blowing up innocent women & children -- not to mention US soldiers -- in the first place. For the record, we didn't initiate the slaughter in Darfur . Bottom line -- this administration's foreign policy is good at unleashing ethnic cleansing & manslaughter... not so good at stopping it.

MatthewRmarler: "It's another 'corner' turned in the long, winding and uphill battle."

Problem is, you're too stupid to recognize that all that corner-turning is nothing but going in circles.

OK. I'm back in.

MatthewRmarler/RMarler? -- I don't think you have military in your family for generations.

You spend a year with your buddies them watching your back, and vice-versa, you get pretty damn tight. Likewise the training is oriented to this. Teamwork, inter-dependence, cohesion, loyalty are all just business buzz words. In the military they matter.

Clearing a house or a surprise fire-fight is not some ad lib.

So when they re-enlist, listen to the reason you hear the most. "I couldn't let my buddies down." Money does not buy it.

And I can hear the marital strife here: "You F*^%@!g love your S#$t army buddies more than me and the kids!"

Marler, war is a shitty, bloody thing. The problem is that this is not war; it's policing with horrible violence where the troops are second-guessing and restrained at every turn. The stress is immence.

TruthPolitik, you are an ass. It's not just about the troops, but the Iraqis, too. And it's Bush and, as President, only Bush who can take the blame for all the death, hurt and destruction that has followed his choice of war and occupation.

Conscientiously, a pull-out tomorrow is not on. But staying there and waging a war against the civilians is not, either.

Tell you what. You tell us your exit strategy, ass.

[deleted]

Suicides are up, marital conflicts are up, and 10% of soldiers and marines reported mistreating civilians when not necessary — an especially serious problem in a counterinsurgency mission designed to win hearts and minds.

Exactly where is there even the tiniest shred of evidence that US forces in Iraq are in any kind of mission designed to win hearts and minds?

Was it just my screen, or did The Washington Montly just implode in response to egbert's 6:22?

Er, that would be the Monthly.

Mercifully deleted now, anyway, thank you.

That was egbert channeling Bush Limraugh's quoting Alicia Colon lying to the NY Sun's readers that US casualties in Iraq were less than total casualties under Clinton. Good for the deleter.

Just to rebut the deleted ebert post:

"With a tip of the hat to Andrew Sullivan, who has already done some of the legwork on this, we'd like to point out the irrelevance of the statistics Colon cites. In fact, when you look at the data provided by the Defense Department, you'll notice that almost none of the deaths during the Clinton administration -- just 76 over an eight-year period -- were from hostile action or terrorism. The rest were the result of accident, homicide, illness or suicide or were of an as-yet-undetermined nature.

These noncombat deaths have not simply stopped happening. There are still noncombat deaths going on in the military, and they are, for the most part, kept as a separate tally from the deaths in Iraq. (To be fair, some of the deaths -- about 16 percent -- that have occurred in Iraq are similarly not the result of hostile action.) The absolute number of deaths that have happened as a result of our invasion of Iraq may not be astoundingly high, but they are still deaths entirely above and beyond those that would happen in the course of normal peacetime military business, and that's not something Colon factors into her argument at all. Military deaths have spiked upward from the final years of the Clinton administration. In 1999, there were 796 total military deaths; in 2000, there were 758; in 2003, there were 1,410; and in 2004, there were 1,887."

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/02/21/colon/index.html

Jesus God, wingnuts, never send to know for whom the bell tolls.

In addition, I regret my typing woes continue unabated.

New Political Animal readers: check out my blog.

truthpolitik: "LISTEN UP PEOPLE The democrats are now in control. If they pass a funding bill then they are responsable for every American death from that date. Reid says the war is lost so why would they continue it."

Tell me -- have such immature rants in past conversations ever earned you anything substantive in life, other than some rolled eyes or scornful glares?

Cheny had a little plan
That only he did know
And every thing that Cheney meant
Was to give his plan promo.

He made a deal with Tom Delay
No liberal Dem could foil
To make that rat Saddam repay
And seize Iraqi oil.

But then the plan did not work out
Despite his hostile sneer.
"We must support the the troops," he'd shout
And try to stir up fear.

"Why do Iraqis hate him so?"
The neocons would cry.
"Why, he beat them up, you know"
Any half-brained fool'd reply

Looks like the long knives are out for Gates; six or seven nameless assassins were willing to make threats in that LAT article.

I hope he doesn't get MacArthur-ed.

(By which I mean being dismissed for insubordination a la the general with that name, not given a genius grant.)

Revive the American Left. This has been nothing but a propaganda war....
It has been terrible watching G Tenet on the talk shows--just another hopelessly straightlaced Republican talker with way too few insignificant apologies. Way too little, too late.
At this juncture, Iraq's horribly mean streets should be enough for us to change the stupid course. An endless and sickening cycle of death and bloodshed. Let's start a new, important surge of diplomacy.
And investigate Rove. Lame duck presidency. Enough of the neocons already

If they pass a funding bill then they are responsable for every American death from that date. Reid says the war is lost so why would they continue it.

Posted by: TruthPolitik on May 6, 2007 at 5:57 PM | PERMALINK

Conscientiously, a pull-out tomorrow is not on. But staying there and waging a war against the civilians is not, either.

Tell you what. You tell us your exit strategy, ass.

Posted by: notthere on May 6, 2007 at 6:21 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah. I thought not.

From truth/liar politic:
"The democrats are now in control.
If they pass a funding bill then they are responsable for every American death from that date. Reid says the war is lost so why would they continue it. "

WRONG. Bush and Cheney started this unnecessary war. Begin impeachment proceedings. This war is a troublesome recruiting ground for terrorists, a way to enrich their many cronies and build their capital.

"Patriotism does not oblige us to acquiesce in the destruction of liberty. Patriotism obliges us to question it, at least." Wendy Kaminer, 2003

Dwight David Eisenhower: "America's leadership and prestige depend not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment."

We mis-used our power.
Wise up.

Al-bot: "..allow our troops to do what they do best - destroying the terrorists and and bringing democracy to Iraq."

And who's stopping them, exactly? And who's stopping you from joining up, cowboy--or are you just a big, fat sack of cowardly shit?

"WRONG. Bush and Cheney started this unnecessary war. Begin impeachment proceedings. This war is a troublesome recruiting ground for terrorists, a way to enrich their many cronies and build their capital."

So do you want to play politics by trying to impeach Bush and Cheney and probably failing. Or do you want to end the war? The democrats could with-hold funding right now. If I believed the war was lost that's what I would do.

"Tell you what. You tell us your exit strategy, ass."

Don't exit.

notthere: I don't think you have military in your family for generations.

why would you think that? What difference does it make?

Bush has never stopped making statements about the Iraq War that are untrue, illogical or irrelevant.

So do you want to play politics by trying to impeach Bush and Cheney and probably failing.

But if they succeeded, then just think of the damage that could be avoided by avoiding two more years of Bush/Cheney.

It's worth a try.

"But if they succeeded, then just think of the damage that could be avoided by avoiding two more years of Bush/Cheney.

It's worth a try. "

Actually I'd like to see the democrats try. Hillary would love to see a president Pelosi.

So I take it you're really don't want to end the war. Just punish Bush and Cheney for starting it.

notthere: I don't think you have military in your family for generations.

For the fun of it, I did a google search. it's harder to find out than I thought.

TruthPolitik: "So I take it you're really don't want to end the war. Just punish Bush and Cheney for starting it."

What is it with wingnuts & either/or? As if you can't end the war AND prove Bush & Cheney to be the liars they are.

"What is it with wingnuts & either/or? As if you can't end the war AND prove Bush & Cheney to be the liars they are."

I could be wrong but It doesn't look like the dems will do either one. I'm just saying if I thought the war was lost I'd try to end it now. Not waste time and energy on impeachment that could come later.

But the dems haven't funded the war yet so we'll have to wait and see.

mhr: "The US is doing, acting and not merely talking ..."

Yes, and killing, killing, killing. And torturing and destroying. Let's see where YOUR heart and mind will follow when overstressed soldiers kick in your doors and rape your daughter in front of you before murdering most of your family. For the sake of democracy.

Yes, the Shiites and Sunnis are doing bad things, too, but who precipitated this mess? Your beloved leader, who will do anything to avoid responsibility for the failures you are so proud of.

Stop fellating the powers that be and start using your brain for a change. Who cares about your moronic talking points when you obviously don't even read the posts you are allegedly responding to. Try thinking about the nation you are helping to wreck, and by that I mean the USA. George Bush is not going to save you, promote you, or even pat you on the head for your efforts, so try thinking about working for the common good every once in a while. Until then, keep swallowing that manure but don't retail it to us as flowers.

Kevin, I apologize for failing to read the link to the LA Times editorial.

Today'w New York Times has an article by Frederick Kagan that could have been written as a refutation of the LA Times editorial. He makes 3 key points:

1. It's too soon to evaluate the success of the surge.

2. In the early going, the surge is showing some good results.

3. One cannot plan now for a withdrawal if the surge fails, because we do not know what conditions we would be planning for.

From Kagan's article:

... there is no Plan B because there cannot be one. The idea that there can be a single alternative strategy, developed now, just at the beginning of the surge, is antithetical to the dynamic nature of war. At this early stage, there are only possible general responses to various contingencies, which will become more focused as operations move forward.

The strategy now under way in Iraq — we are providing an increased number of American forces, working closely with Iraqi troops, to establish and maintain security in Baghdad as a precondition for political, economic and social progress — will change the situation in Iraq significantly, whether or not it succeeds in its aims.

In fact, it has already done so, and for the better: the rebel Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr has apparently fled to Iran; American and Iraqi forces have killed or captured more than 700 key leaders and allies of his Mahdi Army, causing the movement to fragment; sectarian killings in Baghdad in April were about one-third of the level in December.

There have been gains outside the capital as well....

On the political front, the tenor of the Iraqi government’s pronouncements has changed....Mr. Maliki has now permitted repeated strikes against senior Shiite militia leaders...

Some of these promising developments may yield permanent gains; others may offer false hope. But...they will proceed in unpredictable ways.

The point is that it is impossible to say with any confidence what Iraq will look like in the fall. Yes, many things might happen to derail the current plan. But each eventuality would require a different response.

... Military and political plans of this magnitude take months to work, and General Petraeus is right to say that we will not know if this one is working until the fall at the earliest. As the facts on the ground change, our military leaders and policy makers will consider new strategies to deal with them. This is the nature of war.

"... there is no Plan B because there cannot be one. "

Actually the surge is plan "B"

Plan "A" was to train the Iraquis and let them take over. It didn't work.

1. You & your ilk will ALWAYS say that it's too soon to evaluate success, as long as all indicators point to the fact that you are failing. And after four years of this crap, you are, clearly, failing.

2. US casualties have continued unabated, as have Iraqi casualties. You have very interesting ideas about what constitutes "good results."

3. According to this logic, you & your ilk will have us there FOREVER. Unless you've got a crystal ball to go with your magic ponies, you will NEVER know what conditions you're planning for.

You're on a losing streak, and you just can't walk away from the table. Problem is, you're playing with other people's lives.

"U.S. withdrawal, whether concluded next year or five years from now, entails grave risks. But so does U.S. occupation."
Indeed it does, and too few people seem to have figured that out.

The problem is not how many people have figured this out, but which people have figured this out. Or even, which people, who are in a position to do something about it and have figured it out, have the cojones to do anything about it.

Many many people know we are screwed, we screwed ourselves, and being the one who says it is almost as costly as being the one who did it.

you have to look at these funny ass videos about an AQ soap opera..It's called sands of passion by Jerry Zucker who wrote Airplane and Naked Gun

http://www.podtech.net/home/entertainment/2952/national-banana-sands-of-passion-episode-one

He is also a skit on the state of the union - watch Nancy Peloci in the background. I laughed my ass off

ex-liberal: "Kevin, I apologize for...

...helping to destroy the country I pretend to love when really I'm just sucking up to an authoritarian regime whose bloodless grasp on power is growing weaker every day, with each senseless death caused by nothing more than vanity and greed. I'll try to be a better person in the future."

Well, we can dream, can't we?

Bush,s approval rating takes another dive now at 28% , I told you all how wonderful a job he is doing and his approval rating proves it, he and he alone has destroyed the Republican hopefuls for a chance at the White House and I am very glad about that , the last thing Americans need now is another Republican in office. If he walks like duck, smells like a duck, and talks like a duck he must be a Lame Duck. LMFAO

"ex-liberal" wrote: Today'w New York Times has an article by Frederick Kagan blah blah blah

Great ...more bullshit neocon propaganda. Why should anyone credit Kagan's dishonest blather any more than we do "ex-liberal"'s?

Apparently, that "accountability moment" passed and it applies to everyone. Looting begins in five minutes!

Sorry to see them picking on you, Marler, old chum.

Now, drive up to Camp Pendleton and resume your position near the front gate looking for "a few good men".

Gung Ho, Matthew

Now, drive up to Camp Pendleton and resume your position near the front gate looking for "a few good men".

What I really like is to watch the maneuvers up on the hillsides. All the big equipment (strykers, APCs, tanks) is just so cool. And the landing practices, with the helicopters flying in from the aircraft carrier, it's as though all the stuff was made as mobile art. At Miramar I like to watch all the aircraft as they land, especially the sublime FA-18 as they bank over the highways on their final approach.

I grew up on Air Force bases, and I always like watching the aircraft, all aircraft. My father enlisted in the Army Air Corps in about 1939, and he worked on B-25 ground crews in N. Africa and Italy, and was also stationed in England for some time. During the Korean War he was recalled to the U.S. Air Force. Besides numerous places in the U.S., I lived in Japan and Taiwan. I was graduated from Taipei American School in 1965.

…play politics by trying to impeach Bush and Cheney…TruthPolitik at 10:15 P

…Kagan: 1, 2, 3…. ex-lax at 12:19 AM

"[L]eaving aside for a moment the question of what the US should do about the present carnage in Iraq, can we agree that the present carnage in Iraq was the result of a mistaken right-wing policy?"
___________________

It may very well be the result of policy, either ours, their's or both. Whether it's mistaken or not depends on the outcome, which might not be known for years.

We should take care to not make hard and fast rules for what constitutes victory and defeat. Sometime, somewhere, another American Administration will find themselves in another hard fight. While net-bound individuals don't have to maintain any kind of consistency, there is always the danger of labeling something as inevitable or labeling something as being defeat when it isn't necessarily either.

just to note in passing, truthpolitik, the dems already have defunded the war, in that they passed a funding bill with an end date.

bush vetoed it.

2/3 of congress aren't dems, so the veto can't be overriden.

so exactly how is this democratic responsibility?

PS. well, kagan, the inventor of the surge, wants more time to continue to accomplish the same nothing that has been accomplished to date, because there is nothing to accomplish. whoop de damn do.

…Whether it's mistaken or not depends on the outcome, which might not be known for years.… Trashhauler at 2:40 PM

Mike wrote:

Anyone who claims that the deaths of 3500- Americans, the expenditure of $500,000,000,000+, 24,000+ American casualties, 500,000+ Iraqi dead, 3,000,000+ refugees can have a positive outcome is no longer living in the realm of rationality.
______________________

Or perhaps using a longer historical perspective, Mike. What is your measurement of acceptable losses and cost in war? If you don't know, beyond "something less than this," then you haven't any scale upon which to judge.

Anyone who claims to be able to tell the future here is simply playing to the crowd, attempting to bolster their status among like thinkers.

Only ideologues claim that anything is inevitable in war and, even then, they usually do so in hindsight. The only school of warfare that treats inevitability as a serious notion is the Marxist school of war and its various branches. And they've usually been wrong.

Anyone who claims to be able to tell the future here is simply playing to the crowd, attempting to bolster their status among like thinkers.

Actually many of the people here claiming to tell the future have been successfully predicting it since 2002, knowing for sure that:

1)Bush would go to war with Iraq despite pretending diplomacy and inspections.

2)That no WMD's would be found.

3)That Iraq would dissolves into sectarian violence along ethnic fault lines.

4)That elections wouldn't bring a viable government or solve Iraq's problems.

5) That the reconstruction was not only a massive ripoff to American taxpayers and a gift to Republican cronies but that it would turn out to be a failure.

You can read all of these predictions in the archives of this blog and many others.

To be fair, that last one is more along the lines of simle common sense than augury. On second thought: all three are common sense. Perhaps it's just not so common as one would like to think.

Or perhaps using a longer historical perspective, Mike…Trashhauler at 3:52 PM |

Thanks for the Marxist reference. I fail to see it's applicability, but if crying about Marxists gets you through the night…

One used to hear similar crap about Vietnam: losing will destroy American prestige and America's ability to shape world events. Didn't happen then, won't happen now.

I note you still haven't defined victory or an acceptable result for all the waste your war has wrought. Tell us clearly: what has the US gained in the Middle East or anywhere from its invasion of Iraq?