I understand that Iraq doesn’t offer many pleasant options right now. “Stay the course” died years ago, we can’t build up troops if we don’t have them and the various ways of mitigating our current nightmare run up against the problem that we are governed by people who cannot or will not do the right thing. We might as well admit that our homebaked plans (for example) are just so much intellectual wankery. The president is emotionally incapable of admitting the depth of our problem and darth veep will veto any plan that can’t be pushed out the rear of a C-130 transport.
In that light I think that we should recognize this idea of actively promoting the ethnic partition of Iraq for what it is – a horrible, debatably effective plan (the implementation seems guaranteed to produce tragic screwups on a massive scale) that will never happen. My feeling is that Iraq will play out just like the “preparations” for insurgency did. For political reasons withdrawal will be treated as a naughty word, stifling discussion and heading off planning until it becomes absolutely unavoidable. Then when the light finally goes on we will have a chaotic bugout with huge, avoidable losses of men and materiel.
As far as putting a date on B-day, manpower and equipment shortages won’t let us go on for too many more years. Or we could bomb Iran. In that case B-day would come approximately one week later, with much dynamiting of stuff that can’t be airlifted out. I would love to be proved wrong, but if there is another likely path out of there I just don’t see it.
Andrew
There is a clear and obvious plan:
Stop combat patrols.
Close forward operating bases.
Secure the Green Zone and airport.
Hunker down.
This is the best plan I can think of with the current actors.
pie
Why don’t we just get the fuck out, right now? Give the Kurds some weapons, wish them best of luck with the Turks and everyone else, maybe maybe MAYBE keep a base or two up there (though supplying them would be a bitch with Turkey antagonistic), and just head for the borders everywhere else?
Punchy
It’s Stay The Course, you weak-kneed pansy. Anything else you Surrender Macacas dream up is just more typical liberal excrement coming out the wrong hole.
Myrtle Parker
Uh, pie, I’m all for getting the fuck out, but let’s not add more arm’s to the situation. I don’t think Iraq suffers from any lack of firearms…
Bombadil
And wait for the helicopters to arrive while the Marines try to keep civilians from climbing the gates trying to get onto that last helicopter out.
Deja vu, all over again.
Andrew
Um, no, the point is that we’re not bugging out of the Green Zone.
We’re just stopping the sad pretense of providing security outside of our fortresses.
Again, the plan sucks, but it might suck less than all of the others. The biggest roadblock, of course, is W.
docg
This is sort of a high stakes “Revenge of the Nerds” operation. The frat boys are revealed to be the fools everyone knows they are, and the nerds will laugh at them on the way out of town, leaving the frat house in a complete wreck.
Tulkinghorn
Could there be a diplomatic solution to a de facto independent Kurdistan, whereby the US could have established based, in return for helping Iran and Turkey secure the borders so the rebellion is not exported out of Kurdistan?
It would be an improvement over the status quo for everyone, but may not be politically feasible given how many bridges have been burned. Still, that would allow Central and Southern Iraq to be abandoned to its murderous devices while keeping a counterweight to Turkish and Iranian influence.
I guess it is too late to hope for creative thinking.
Bombadil
Once we’ve stopped combat patrols, closed forward operating bases, secured the Green Zone and airport, and are hunkering down, what are we going to do then? Stay there and hope it all gets better? Wait until someone comes by the gates and yells “olly, olly, in come free”? Hope someone finally shows up with flowers, candy and thank-you cards?
If/when we get to the point that all we have left is the Green Zone and the airport (which is seeming more and more inevitable), we have no alternative but to bug out.
Punchy
Great idea. Let’s split Iraq into the Omega Mus and the Tri-Lambas. Genius.
Big Pimpin'
Can’t help but feel that this is all a Bush endgame designed to let our inevitable military defeat in Iraq happen on somebody else’s watch. We’re down to deniability now. Nobody wants this one wrapped around their necks in the history books, so our military will continue to serve as targets for Islamic militants and other concerned Middle East citizens while our erstwhile leaders point fingers and lay blame.
Where is Gerald Ford when we need him? It’s time for a historic reappraisal of this unfairly maligned man.
Bombadil
I think the Kurds would be more concerned about the Turks being proactive and moving in on Kurdistan.
VidaLoca
Andrew,
Not to be argumentative here because I realize that everyone is trying to consider what should be done among a very unattractive set of end-game options.
However, once you fall back to your secure bases you have to continue to defend your ground supply lines, or settle for very expensive (in material and personnel, given ground-air missiles) resupply by air. Much worse, once you cede the area around your base to the opposition you get more debacles like FOB Falcon (scroll down about 1/4 of the page).
October 10, 2006. Over 300 casualties. No mention in the US media, just the BBC. Funny, that.
You’re right, the biggest roadblock is W. But by the time the Smart People figure that out, it will be much too late.
It’s either this if we try to stay, or leave now. And we don’t have much more time to make up our minds.
ThymeZone
Look, Bush told us what he was going to do months ago.
“It’s up to future presidents.”
I think he meant it, and I think he is on track to keep that pledge.
The question is not what happens to Iraq in the next two years, clearly nobody in the White House cares about that or has ever cared. The question is how the GOP handles this fuckup and manages its way through the 2008 election cycle.
Watch, and learn.
Darrell
See here. Any credible news reports listing the 300 casualties?
ThymeZone
Oh, Darrell is here. So …. another lost thread?
VidaLoca
No doubt this is what Bush is hoping for. And maybe it would work out that way if this were all falling apart in a linear manner.
Problem is, when things like this fall apart they fall apart exponentially. Consider Vietnam in the spring of 1975. Bush will be gone in January 2009 but by then Iraq may be long over.
Steve Gilliard has put up some good posts over the last 3 weeks or so discussing logistics of withdrawl and the political context in which we would do so. It’s worth taking the time to scroll back through his archives. Very depressing reading.
Big Pimpin'
Darrell the watchdog of credible reporting. Now there’s a big effing stretch.
Oxy + Moron = Darrell
scarshapedstar
The people who scare me the most these days are the Tom Clancy motherfuckers who still believe that we are completely omnipotent and could simply airlift everyone out in 3 hours if we needed to. Bullshit. When we leave, 90% of our forces are going to be headed down a 500 mile highway to Kuwait. And the 30 mile trip to the airport already has too many booby traps and ambush points for us to clear anymore.
This is going to shock the crew who still fervently believe that eyes-in-the-sky and magic bullets can save us from anything, but it could end up looking a lot like the Highway of Death from the first Iraq war.
Zifnab
Honestly, I think the place where big time diplomacy could do the most good is between Turkey and the Kurds. The biggest obstacle to the “Three State” solution, from where I’m sitting, is the Turks’ adamant opposition to a Kurdish nation. This is an understandable objection, because they’ve got some very real reason to believe that a nation of Kurds will be extremely hostile to the northern neighbor who’s given their people so much hell for so long.
Get the Kurds and the Turks to settle down and co-exist peacefully, and you have the foundation for a relatively peaceful and friendly nothern Iraq. Then you can talk about repositioning troops, securing areas that actually have a snowball’s chance in hell of staying secure, and even keeping a military base or two.
As for the Sunni and Shia, this notion that American troops or a unity government will somehow make them play nice is a delusion that only a Neo-Con could truly believe in. Saying “We have to stop the bloodshed” turns on the notion that we possess any say in the matter. The past three years seem to prove that we do not.
I’m with Pie and the rest of the “cut-and-run”ers. We’re not doing anybody any favors by sticking around.
Zifnab
At least he’s got clear skin.
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Of course not — his own BBC link said no casualties, no injuries. Did you check out that other loon-site that he linked? Says all you need to know about that guy — a typical unhinged moonbat who only wishes there were 300 casualties, so he could assert his imagined moral superiority to The Man.
Don McArthur
Considering that Iraq has the 4th largest proven oil reserves on the planet, our military will go no further than to shifting to defensive positions around those fields.
ThymeZone
Why would a guy who sat here and defended the bombing of civilians and kids last summer suddenly be concerned about the reporting of casualties?
When you can pimp air war, which is mechanized terrorism, and is almost always war against civilians … what moral soapbox can you stand upon to demand better casualty reporting?
This is going to require some deft explanation.
Punchy
300 Causalties? What are you talking about? From your link:
I’m pretty sure 300 causalties would have been damn impossible to hide/cover up.
ThymeZone
POTH.
Andrew
Feel free to be argumentative. I fucking hate politesse.
I should be a little more specific:
There should obviously be security patrols around the mega-bases for security purposes. Supply lines are an interesting question — let’s get rid of the FOBs not necessary for resupply. “Securing” Ramadi and Fallujah is just delaying their eventual collapse (like Iraq writ small).
Eventually, we can pull back to Kurdistan and one or two more remote mega-bases like Balad and al-Asad, from which we conduct combat missions only against massed troop movements.
We cannot pull out of the green zone and the airport because everything would collapse instantly. I might even suggest expanding the green zone/airport corridor. The failure to do so at the beginning was one of the top 3 strategic AND tactical failures of the war.
Again, all reasonable solutions are off of the table as long as Bush is involved. I’m arguing from a baseline position of insanity, period.
Zifnab
The GOP is fucked in ’08. I can’t see anything that will dig them out of their own personal political trench of hell. What’s going to be interesting in ’10 and ’12 is the marked increase in “Democrats are worse” rhetoric that comes pouring out of the Limbaugh-munity.
The big question we need to answer is whether America has the attention span and memory capacity to know exactly what a Republican Majority looks like. Can the ‘Pubs successfully brand Nancy Pelosi as the “Majority Leader who ruined the economy” or the Dem President of ’08 as “The guy that let the Terrorists Win(tm)”?
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Don’t worry. Democrats are all super-intelligent (just ask them) and will find a “smarter” way in Iraq.
Ooops.
scarshapedstar
You mean South Turkey.
Actually, what the hell? Why not just partition it and ask/force Iraq’s neighbors to annex it. You know it’s bound to happen anyway, once the fighting from the civil war starts to spill into neighboring countries. Give Kurdistan to Turkey, the western oil fields to the Saudis (along with the Sunni population of Baghdad) and give the rest to Iran.
VidaLoca
Is the other link I put on that comment not credible enough?
It lists individuals by name — I did not count the list to see if it had 300 entries however.
scarshapedstar
I’m pretty sure it’s damn impossible to blow up hundreds of tons of munitions and not hurt anybody. Maybe, miraculously, nobody died. But when was the last time the Pentagon released figures on the number of soldiers injured? You know, they used to be included in the number of casualties, until the development of body armor made some PR whiz realize that if you stop tallying the guys who lose two or three limbs and their frontal lobe to a roadside bomb then it’s easy to cover up the fact that we’re losing soldiers even faster than in Vietnam. And given that this would undoubtedly go down in history as the Beirut Barracks Bombing moment of this presidency and this war, you can bet they’re pulling out all the stops.
Tim F.
Tom Clancy wrote a book with Anthony Zinni criticizing the Iraq war. I honestly think that our war leaders who have any real military knowledge cry themselves to sleep.
Punchy
Now we got entire law offices commenting on here?
Krista
Yep, and they’ve evidently missed the fact that the item is being discussed on the previous thread, and that the only person here who is defending Sylvestre Reyes is Darrell.
Punchy
I just threw up in my mouth. Darrell…defending a Democrat. Sweet Jesus, the apocolypse is nigh…
Darrell
Uh Krista, the only thing I was “defending”, was the lumping in of Reyes in the same category with criminal-elect William Jefferson. Typical of you to offer such a dishonest characterization.
Tsulagi
There is a clear and obvious plan:
Already happening. At one point I believe we were near 100 FOBs in Iraq and now around 40. As this Armed Forces Journal article from June mentions the current plans are for consolidating down to 14 big FOBs.
Fewer FOBs means less patrols necessary for base protection and supply routes means less driving by IEDs or ambushes. Which hopefully lessens unhappy news containing untidy KIA announcements. Which hopefully helps upcoming midterm elections. Oops, that plan didn’t work out well either. As Nir Rosen mentioned in an article linked here last week, you can go days without seeing an American patrol in Baghdad.
The blockquoted have pretty much been the “adapt to win” tactics along with training the
militiasISFs. Reality? Close eyes, put fingers in ears, and stay the course for two more years to tag this mess on the next guy sworn in.demimondian
Or he’s about to go into labor.
fester
Okay, I just have a simple question for Andrew on 12/11 2:20
pm where he said:
There should obviously be security patrols around the mega-bases for security purposes. Supply lines are an interesting question—let’s get rid of the FOBs not necessary for resupply. “Securing” Ramadi and Fallujah is just delaying their eventual collapse (like Iraq writ small).
Eventually, we can pull back to Kurdistan and one or two more remote mega-bases like Balad and al-Asad, from which we conduct combat missions only against massed troop movements.
We cannot pull out of the green zone and the airport because everything would collapse instantly. I might even suggest expanding the green zone/airport corridor. The failure to do so at the beginning was one of the top 3 strategic AND tactical failures of the war.
The major supply bases (known as the Contigency Operating Bases, and the strategic airheads) are all near major population centers as that is where the roads are. So even pulling US forces back to Balad, and Al Asad will mean US supply lines will be going through major chokepoints and insurgent/militia controlled territory. Al Asad is probably incapable of supporting significant offensive operations if Ramadi and Fallujah are abandoned and Highway Ten westbound from Baghdad is cut.
Kurdistan as a garrison location is logistically very, very, very difficult as there are only two supply lines — Basra/Kuwait City-Baghdad-Balad-Kurdistan, 600+ miles of insurgent/militia contested battlespace, to get bulk supplies into a friendly environment OR Turkish Meditarean ports overland to Irbil. The problem is that a significant US Army garrison in the north gives the Kurds de facto independence as the rest of Iraq burns. The Turks will not like this, so the US supply line from the Med is politically constrained.
And finally, increasing the security of BIAP-Route Irish-Green Zone means thousands of US troops actively patrolling in Baghdad, OR the razing of a significant portion of the city…. both non-starters in my mind.
Krista
Oh, don’t start. I don’t have the patience for you’re “everybody’s dishonest except for me” bullshit today. Fine. You weren’t defending Reyes. You simply stated that you didn’t understand why anybody would put him in the same category as Jefferson, even though a commenter mentioning another blogger who berated the two men in two separate posts really kind of stretches the definition of putting the two of them in the same category.
That would be like saying that John has put Bush, Bin Laden, and Cindy Sheehan in the same category, because he’s written separate posts berating them.
Krista
Ye gods. It’s definitely time for coffee.
Tsulagi
Sorry, forgot my Armed Forces Journal link in my comment above.
Anyway…
Well, it’s possible partition may happen by the Iraqis themselves, but our promoting it and using our military to achieve (or attempt) it would be another disaster on top of a disaster. You only have to think a few minutes about the nightmare of implementation from our end to realize that. No one would be happy with the lines drawn and they would keep changing.
The admin has already been doing a heckuva job on winning Iraqi “hearts and minds.” Yeah, let’s jump in on partitioning and work toward achieving generations of hatred toward the U.S. among all factions in Iraq.
ThymeZone
Well, wait …. it’s congruent with Bush’s announced intentions. He can start the process and then leave it to “future presidents” to straighten it all out.
That’s what he said he would do. See, that’s the beauty of the Future Presidents Model of executive accountability: It’s flexible.
TenguPhule
Even that idea is doomed to failure. That simply allows the guerillas to turn this into Siege Warfare, which is a losing proposition for the defenders. You can kiss any hope of resupply goodbye for intents and purposes.
And that doesn’t even mention the problems of having guerillas able to concentrate their forces for actual serious attacks on the bases. The outer defenses are tough, but if they ever manage to get forces inside to the soft center, it will be a bloodbath.
Just wait for it all to go to hell in a handbasket, that’s all really that’s left now.
Unless some genius can come up with a plan that can operate under the following constraints:
A. Can’t have troops pulling out.
B. Can’t have more troops going in.
C. Can’t continue to have the same number of troops just left there.
D. Can’t talk to Iran or Syria.
E. Can’t ally with the Shiia.
F. Can’t ally with the Sunni.
G. Can’t ally with the Kurds.
srv
Arguably, the simplist way to stabilize Iraq is to put the Sunni/Baathists back in power. They’re obviously not going anywhere, and the alternative is a Shia dominated state lovefest with Iran. If you don’t want that, then you should have loved Saddam more.
Pb
VidaLoca,
No, that link alone is not credible–can you substantiate anything about any of the 300 people alleged to have been killed on that list? Like, that any of them have ever existed?
Ryan S.
Get together with the leaders of the Sunnis(does anyone know who in charge of them? all you hear is Sunni this Sunni that but who leads them does anyone even know), Shia(like Al Sader), and Kurds. Get negotiations going, you know like diplomacy, mediation, reparations( yes all words this admin is allergic too). If you can get them to stop shooting each other then redeploy to the borders and make it hell for anyone to cross the border illegally.
ThymeZone
{ Kurds and whey …. whatever that means. Heh. }
H. Duck the problem and leave it to Future Presidents!
Karl! I’ve got it!
ThymeZone
Oh, my previous post was transcribed from an actual Cabinet meeting.
I have the link here somewhere ………
Andrew
I think I’ve figured out how the next stage of the Iraq debate is going to go: one side will discuss the reality on the ground, and the other, not wanting to acknowledge that reality, will hyper-focus on minor issues and act as if this somehow trumps everything else. (“I’m going to conveniently ignore the tons of new developments that make my optimistic view of the war look stupid, and focus on what some random person said!”) I deem this the Christopher Hitchens Method.
Tim F.
Like the Turkish Army? That should be fun.
ThymeZone
Look, over there, a Jacka … I mean, Jillalope!
It’s thanks to that crazy woman and people like her that we’re in the mess we’re in now.
The Other Steve
Ammunitions stores are usually surrounded by earthen barriers so that if they blow, the explosion goes upwards and not outwards.
ThymeZone
That’s the same reason that most righty blogs are done in basements.
VidaLoca
May, in fact, be. I can’t find other/better sources w/r/t the 300 casualties figure and the ones I can find all seem to go back to the one I linked.
Ryan S.
Why would the Turkish army attack? I didn’t say partition Iraq .
Andrew
Andrew says:
Hey, that’s not me.
I agree with not-me, but I think he should get a cooler name.
TenguPhule
Nobody else would send troops into Iraq. And we don’t have enough to watch Iraq’s borders.
Not to mention, talks between parties are a non-starter in Iraq because they violate contraints E-G. We can’t even pretend to be a neutral party, which means at least 2 out of the three will consider us on the other side.
Waterhouse
It’s really late where I’m at, so I’m going to do a drive-by (I know, it’s deplorable, more so for a first post, but I had to get this off my chest before the thread dries up).
The only thing to do at this point is swallow our pride, realize we’re in an untenable situation, and begin negotiations with Iran and Syria to attempt peacemaking efforts between the factions in Iraq. True, the Sunnis hate ’em both, but the Shia have to respect Iran. And if you can get honest efforts at reconciliation from the more powerful Shia, the Sunnis are far more likely to compromise.
Iran won’t come to the table having already met all of W’s demands, because they know we’re in no position to make demands at this point. Iraq is completely FUBAR and they know we have no way out. Yes, there’s a lot of bad blood between us, but that’s what diplomacy is all about: finding a way to live with (or put aside) your differences and working toward a mutually beneficial result. It’s okay, neo-cons, we can still hate Iran at the end of the day; that’s not what this is about.
Unfortunately, W doesn’t believe in true diplomacy, and won’t even sit down with Iran (or anyone else) until they’ve already accomplished everything he would have demanded at the negotiating table.
Oh, one more thing. Bombing/attacking Iran? Quite apart from not accomplishing anything for Iraq, it would undoubtedly secure the one true legacy W has sought for his presidency: apocalypse throughout the ME and war that endures long after his tenure has fizzled.
Andrew
fester says:
I think they deserve it. I suppose that sounds very neo-con-ish. Oh well.
I think Iraq will burn, but if we can keep the Kurds safe, we should, supply difficulties or not. Perhaps we can strike a deal with Turkey for supply in return for preventing the Kurds from declaring independence.
Andrew
Who is pushing this strategy? Did the military decide to consolidate or the geniuses in the Whitehouse?
Are there any possible improvements to this strategy? Given that Bush is in charge…
They way I figure it, we either improve on this basic model, or we sack up and impeach Bush and Cheney. There are no other options.
Pb
VidaLoca,
Here’s someone else who got sucked into it, apparently asked some people, and finally concluded that it was a hoax. Also, here’s an uncorroborated account with some interesting alleged details that at least sound more likely… :)
Jake
That’s the same reason that most righty blogs are done in ^a parent’s basement
s.Fixed.
Conversations/debates such as these prove that Bush has raised the bar on the definition of FUBAR. I don’t have a solution because I don’t think there is one any more than there’s a “solution” to an on-going train wreck once the first car jumps the tracks. I do have a prediction: Iraq’s leadership will tell us to get the hell out. Of course the question remains: Will The Decider decide to ignore them, making the invasion official, or will he seize on an excuse to blame whatever happens next on those dang freedom hatin’ ‘raqis?
Tim F.
If we leave the Kurds go indy and the Turks come in. Kurdistan doesn’t want anything to do with the Sunni-Shiite bloodbath that will be going on to their south.
Other than kicking them out of Kirkuk, of course.
Ryan S.
I didn’t say pull out U.S. troops yet. Quit adding things to it.
I’d just like to see a full blown diplomatic effort to stabalize the country before I would consider withdrawing our troops. I think we owe the Iraqi people that much. Now personally I don’t see that happening as Bush can’t seem to tell a Diplomat from a ‘Terrist’, but I still would like to see that tried before withdrawing partially or completely.
I realize it would probably take some sort of diplomatic miracle to even get the 3 sides to talk to us, and may not even be possible. Again, I would like see some sort of evidence that this was tried before supporting a all out withdrawl.
TenguPhule
It was tried, that’s how they came up with the current joke of an Iraqi ‘government’, remember?
Tsulagi
See this…
And see current situation on ground.
The military is doing what it can to minimize KIA and WIA while ordered to sit in the kill zone of a civil war. They know there is nothing they can achieve militarily, and have said so. So move in this direction to slow the losses while The Decider continues to deciderate and work his uniting not dividing magic in Iraq.
Back in August retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey said “The place is a mess. There are thousands of Iraqis being killed or injured each week. We‘re losing a battalion a month killed and wounded, 500, 600, 700 soldiers and marines and we‘re spending $7 billion a month and it‘s going in the wrong direction.”
Actually, most of the WIA will return to duty. Some immediately, some never. It’s not quite the equivalent of a battalion a month irretrievably lost.
A few months ago the sage, all-knowing military geniuses of the retarded far-right said the jihadists were consciously helping the Dems with the midterms by creating a big uptick in violence. Gee, maybe if Bill O. and Hannity aren’t too busy with the War on Christmas they could let the jihadists know the elections are over because it’s only gotten worse since then.
TenguPhule
That’s debatable actually. My understanding was that a lot of these injuries are to the head and brain from IEDs. Though given the change in the war’s tempo so far, I could be wrong.
Ryan S.
Yes, but what happened after the government was propped up. “Thats it we’re done”, and the diplomatic efforts were stopped, granted that was prolly the most idiotic thing to do, but I’d like to see it started up again and given 6 months to a year, then if nothing gets better, thats it I’m done.
Andrew
So it boils down to this: it is completely immoral for the Democrats not to impeach the President. Failure to impeach is equivalent to condoning the slow failure in Iraq.
The realpolitik argument against this is that it would ruin the Dems’ chances in ’08. So, apparently, would exercising financial restraint to force withdrawal.
Wow, what a shitty country we are if the best we can do is to let young Americans die by the twos and fives and tens for another two years because we are political cowards.
So, what now? What can be done?
stickler
Andrew:
Given our national leadership, nothing can be done. Literally nothing. Bush will fiddle, and even if he became proactive the situation has spiraled out of our control anyhow.
We’re just along for the ride at this point.
TenguPhule
I’m sure we’ve all had enough of the F.U.s. The pony is gone, let’s pack it up and go home already.
TenguPhule
There’s always Operation Darrell Shield we could put into action during the final retreat.
Ryan S.
Friedman can be an idiot sometimes. But I don’t think we have a choice I’m pretty sure only an act of congress would be able to bring the troops home in the next two years anyway, I’d just like to see those things i mentioned done in the intrim, but I’m not hopefull, it will prolly fail anyway, its just something that would make it a little easier to take.
TenguPhule
I dispute that. Friedman is *ALWAYS* an idiot.
Andrew
Tyler Durden asks:
I’d fight Tom Friedman.
ThymeZone
No.
Dick.Cheney.
This has been another edition of “damned if you do and damned if you don’t(c).”
(C)2000, 2004 Republican National Committee
The Other Steve
Right, because President Cheney is going to do a much better job.
The amount of time people fucking waste on this impeachment discussion amazes me. IT AIN’T GONNA HAPPEN.
Pb
ThymeZone, The Other Steve, et. al.,
You do realize that it’s possible to impeach both Bush and Cheney, right? It isn’t some sort of either/or deal.
Of course, then we’d have President Pelosi…
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Krista wrote:
Yeah, Krista, I’ll bet you Dems are really letting this know-nothing INTELLIGENCE Committee chair-designate have it! Let’s just review the savage comments you guys had for this unqualified, incompetent embarrassing boob-in-waiting. Well…upon reading, there’s absolutely nothing from you, Krista. OK, let’s see, there were exactly two comments:
Oh, no! Snap! You’ve just been zinged, Reyes! Oooooo — “Timbuuuuuuuuuurn!”
There were also a couple comments that said, essentially, sure, he’s an idiot, but he’s still smarter than the Republicans. Double burn!
So please stop implying that the Democrats are being one-one-millionth as hard on their own as they have been on the GOP. Such nonsense is really beneath us all. Let’s just call it blind partisanship, because that’s what it is.
TenguPhule
That’s right, Pelosi 2007!
We can then proceed to the herding of wingnutters and wise old men in preparation for their sacrificial bloodletting to curry the favor of President Hillary in 2009.
TenguPhule
Let’s just call it something that needs to be fixed.
Because he’s still a *VAST* improvement over the prior Republican who didn’t even know there were two sides to begin with.
Zifnab
You say that like he’s not effectively the President already.
Tsulagi
I hear you. And later retarded shit like this…
Oh, you weren’t talking about Bush?
Andrew
Throw in David Brooks. I’d beat that asshole so silly he might write something smart.
ThymeZone
It’s just hard to read that material without applying the corrections, that’s all.
Sorry.
pie
Let’s just get the fuck out. Now. By “now” I realize that a week or a month or so might be involved, but the point really is to just drop our commitments and get the fuck out of there as soon as possible.
As for the “Highway of Death” bogeyman, we do still control the air, which is something of a difference from what the Iraqis went through in the last war. But the larger issue is, no one was suggesting that, anymore than anyone was suggesting that our troops should walk out through the desert.
Also, if we’re going to partition Iraq and let its neighbors have it, I think we should give Anbar to Syria. They’ve earned it.
grumpy realist
What everyone in the White House (and elsewhere) is carefully avoiding looking at is: we may not have the time to do anything. Logistics for removal and getting the hello out of there aren’t going to be quick or simple.
Let us say a bunch of Sadr’s kiddies decided to launch a full-out attack on the Green Zone.
Is there anything we could do about it? Honestly?
TenguPhule
Well Bush could always take a page from Reagan’s Iran Contra plan….
Andrew
Okay, I found an idea:
A war tax. Make the cost of war a reality.
It’s the most politically defensible tax I’ve EVER heard of.
Tulkinghorn
War Tax…
How about a Federal 3% sales tax, let the states collect it and keep the first 1%, 1% for the war, 1% to pay down the national debt…
Any takers out there for the 3% solution?
Chuck Butcher
A withdrawal in force is not something that can be worked up in a day or two, but it can be done and done in such a way that’s damn dangerous for anyone to interfere with. That will leave a mess in Iraq, well – Saddam is gone, they’ve got an elected “government” – I think it’s time to let them sort it out themselves.
As far as Iranians and Iraqis being Shia’s, they also are Persians and Arabs, evidently that particular bit of racism has been overlooked.
If they’d like some help rebuilding after they’ve sorted out their 1400 year old mess, I reckon they can ask. Muslims in that part of the world want theocracy, it makes for this kind of crap, but it’s what they want. I think they should have it. As for the Darrells and US security, they’re going to thin the population considerably and be real busy whacking each other, possibly a good outcome – pragmatically speaking.
Oh, and I’d like to thank BushCo for making this possible…
Pb
Yay war tax. How about… 0% if you’re in the military, 1% normally, and then 2% if you’re pro-(other people’s)war… Or maybe we can just get a flat-out 101st Keyboarder’s tax? Support Our Troops, cheapskates, and put your money where your mouth is!
pie
Um, er, well, I opposed the war before I supported it, so I shouldn’t have to pay!
Rehjiggg
jhd trewdsca
jhd trewdsca