Democrats and Withdrawal from Iraq: Asking Too Much?

For Democrats, here's the bad news: now that they have won control of Congress, they are expected to not only criticize President Bush's policies in Iraq but to derive a solution to the mess he has created.

On Thursday morning, incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid met with several journalists, including yours truly. In his opening remarks, he outlined his plans. He noted that he will compel senators to work longer hours and dramatically expand the Tuesday-through-Thursday-at-noon work week that has become routine in the Senate. He said he would cut back on recess time. The first bill he intends to introduce as majority leader, he declared, would target sleazy campaign tactics, and he pointed to the misleading robocalls and false campaign literature used by Republicans in the final days of the recent congressional elections. He then turned to Iraq and called for some form of a "phased withdrawal."

"What we need to do first of all is implement the laws of the land," Reid said, referring to a resolution passed months ago by Congress calling for 2006 to be a year of significant transition in Iraq. "This law has been ignored," he complained. And he noted that 39 senators did vote for a Democratic amendment--another non-binding resolution--urging the beginning of the redeployment of troops from Iraq (without setting any deadlines for their departure). Reid indicated that he and the Democrats would continue to press for initiating a withdrawal: "We're an occupying force." But Reid also said that the United States had "to do a better job" on counterinsurgency and the training of Iraqi security forces. Pointing out that Baghdad now has less than fours of electricity a day, Reid said, "We need to revitalize reconstruction." He also called for a regional conference to work out a path ahead for Iraq.

But here's the rub: can the United States rebuild Iraq and remake its security forces while intense sectarian conflict is under way? And can it do so while removing troops? I asked Reid if the revitalization of Iraq and the creation of an Iraqi military and police force that is not beholden to sects and militias is at this point "a bridge too far." His reply: "It may be a bridge too far, but at least it's a bridge somewhere....There has to be a plan to get us out of there...This is my plan."

There seems to be a contradiction between the two sides of this plan: disengage (via troop withdrawals) but make reconstruction and training work. Reid noted the recent testimony of General John Abizaid, the head of Central Command, who said that progress needed to happen in Iraq in the next four to five months, and Reid compared this remark to the comment of Senator Carl Levin, the Democrat who will become chairman of the armed services committee, who said that redeployment of US troops should begin in four or five months. He appeared to be suggesting that under a Democratic plan there would be a window of opportunity--four or five months--for the Bush administration and the Iraqi government (such as it is) to work things out before US troops would start to leave. But it isn't realistic to expect significant (and positive) change within this time, especially when the situation in Iraq appears to worsen by the week.

As Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus reported on Friday--in an article headlined, "Violence in Iraq Called Increasingly Complex"--the dynamics of the conflict in Iraq are becoming harder, not easier, to sort out and address. He wrote:

Attacks in Iraq reached a high of approximately 180 a day last month, reflecting an increasingly complicated conflict that includes sectarian clashes of Sunni and Shiite militias on top of continuing strikes by insurgents, criminal gangs and al-Qaeda terrorists, according to the directors of the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency.

"No single narrative is sufficient to explain all the violence we see in Iraq today," Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the CIA director, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Wednesday.

Attempting to describe the enemy, Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, the DIA director, listed "Iraqi nationalists, ex-Baathists, former military, angry Sunni, Jihadists, foreign fighters and al-Qaeda," who create an "overlapping, complex and multi-polar Sunni insurgent and terrorist environment." He added that "Shia militias and Shia militants, some Kurdish pesh merga, and extensive criminal activity further contribute to violence, instability and insecurity."

These descriptions suggest an increasingly difficult state of affairs that will not be much improved in four or five months.

And if the president does not heed the Democrats' call to start withdrawing troops by the spring, what will they do? After all, Reid noted that when he met with Bush the previous week he did not sense much "willingness to change." So will he, House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi, who has also advocated a withdrawal of troops, and the Democrats try to choke off funding for the war or attempt to impose legislative mandates upon the commander in chief? "We're not going to back off this," Reid said--without mentioning any specific steps. If Bush stays the course or elects to send more troops to Iraq, Reid said, "We'll speak out loudly." Speaking out loudly, though, will not likely persuade Bush at this stage or lead to any course corrections.

Reid noted that Iraq is "the number-one issue" for the Senate's new Democrats and the war is "hurting our country." He added, "the whole situation [in Iraq] is breaking down." But can Iraq be saved? As Democrats establish their opening position in the coming fight with the White House over Iraq--a battle that will be shaped by whatever former Secretary of State James Baker's Iraq Study Group recommends next month--they are asking for a lot: disengagement from Iraq and a US policy that results in a better Iraq (one with a functioning central government, a revived economy, and effective security forces not under the control or influence of sectarian militias). Redeployment is certainly achievable; making Iraq work may not be. There certainly is no guarantee that the withdrawal will quickly lead to a stable and secure Iraq. Pulling out American troops might remove a possible obstacle to a political accommodation among Iraqi parties that leads to less chaos and violence. The removal of troops, though, could cause the opposite and render it tougher for the Iraqi government (even with much U.S. assistance) to rebuild the nation's infrastructure and to train a worthwhile military and police force--particularly if other nations, including those of the region, do not become more involved in repairing Iraq.

In calling for a phased withdrawal, Reid, Pelosi, and the Democrats need to be careful not to promise that the removal of troops will be accompanied by political, economic, and security improvements. They might have to choose between disengagement and the continuing (though failing) effort to stand up an effective government and Iraqi army. The Democrats also must ponder how oppositional to be should Bush adhere to Vice President Cheney's pre-election vow to go "full speed ahead" with their current Iraq policy.

As the Democrats take over the legislative branch, they are assuming fifty-fifty ownership of one of the most vexing foreign policy challenges in the nation's history: how to undo Bush's war in Iraq. They have to realize that disengagement--even if the correct call--might carry with it ugly consequences and not bolster the prospects for rebuilding and stabilizing Iraq. Sadly, those aims, due to Bush's blunders, may be beyond America's control. So far that has been tough for the Democrats--or Bush--to admit.

******

At the breakfast meeting with journalists, Reid also said:

* The Senate intelligence committee will finish its so-called Phase II inquiry, which is supposed to evaluate how the Bush administration used the prewar intelligence to garner public support for the invasion of Iraq. A year ago, Reid closed down the Senate to protest the Republican delay in producing this report. "That will be completed now," he said. "It may not help us in the future, but it will give us the historical background of what got us into the war." He added, "We're going to get the answers to that out....We have been jerked around....And we're not going to take it anymore."

* He intends to target tax breaks for the oil industry and the monopoly exemption enjoyed by the insurance industry. "We have to rise up," he said.

* He fully backs Howard Dean as the Democratic Party chairman. "I didn't support his running for the chair of the DNC," Reid said. "I was wrong. He was right....I support his grassroots Democratic Party-building."

******

DON"T FORGET ABOUT HUBRIS: THE INSIDE STORY OF SPIN, SCANDAL, AND THE SELLING OF THE IRAQ WAR, the best-selling book by David Corn and Michael Isikoff. Click here for information on the book. The New York Times calls Hubris "the most comprehensive account of the White House's political machinations" and "fascinating reading." The Washington Post says, "There have been many books about the Iraq war....This one, however, pulls together with unusually shocking clarity the multiple failures of process and statecraft." Tom Brokaw notes Hubris "is a bold and provocative book that will quickly become an explosive part of the national debate on how we got involved in Iraq." Hendrik Hertzberg, senior editor of The New Yorker notes, "The selling of Bush's Iraq debacle is one of the most important--and appalling--stories of the last half-century, and Michael Isikoff and David Corn have reported the hell out of it." For highlights from Hubris, click here.

Comments (245)

1. Cut and run away from our responsibility.

   Posted by john maasch at 11/17/2006 @ 12:11pm

2. FRANKGRITS,

   I agree with you 100 percent on this one. As General Hayden said it best, no single narrative describes the situation in Iraq. Why in the world would America abandon its soldiers to such a morass and complicated mess? Brave soldiers do not belong in such a hellish nightmare not knowing what to expect or what to do for that matter.

   Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 12:15pm

3. JOHN MAASCH,

   1. Weapons of mass destruction no longer in play, check 2. Saddam is in prison waiting to be hanged, check 3. No ties to Al Qaeda and Saddam exist, check 4. Iraqi people liberated and have elected government, check

   We provide funding at the local level for reconstruction and withdraw all troops. So what more so-called responsibility do we have there? Define it please.............

   Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 12:20pm

4. FG wrote: "'of the people, by the people and for the people"

   In fairy-tale land we always have been and always will be.

   Posted by urmygyro at 11/17/2006 @ 12:22pm

5. URMYGYRO,

   We are in fairy tale land because that is where people wish to be. The voters have to vote for an alternative vision before it become reality.................

   Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 12:24pm

6. "There seems to be a contradiction between the two sides of this plan: disengage (via troop withdrawals) but make reconstruction and training work."

   A contradiction?!?!?!....from Democrats??!?!?!....Impossible!

   After all, all Reid is calling for with his "withdraw, but reconstruct" "plan", is "All good things should happen, and no bad things should happen".

   What could be more Democratic than that?

   Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 12:29pm

7. Some of us still belive in this experiment called democracy and it's still the best form of government, but not for Iraq.

   Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/17/2006 @ 12:26am

   "but not for Iraq"?!?!!?.....why is that, FRANK?

   Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 12:29pm

8. It's all over but the finger pointing. "No single narrative." Did he mean to say this is way the hell out of control? Our troops are not on a mission any more. They are simply scapegoats and targets. Democrats need to 1) draw the line on troop levels 2) not back down on withdrawal 3) stop letting people in positions of responsibility blow smoke.

   If this situation is something we can no longer improve, it's time to leave. The only thing worse than losing is not being able to admit when you've lost.

   Posted by MyParadigm at 11/17/2006 @ 12:37pm

9. This probably belongs here, then, not over at the other blog:

   I say poop or get off the pot. Another 50k troops minimum, if we can find and train them. Contractors that know what they are doing, backed by armed US/Arab soldiers, not mercenaries. Build the hospitals and schools like we were supposed to, under heavy guard. Rebuild the electric, water and sewage plants, under heavy guard. Take land and hold it till done with the project.

   Or begin phased withdrawal, end date Dec 07. Let Poseidon sort em out.

   Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 12:37pm

10. FRANKGRITS,

    Agreed. I would refer to him as General Abizaid Custard. He has know spine what-so-ever. Did you see his pathetic testimony in front of the Senate Armed Services committee on C-SPAN? Even John McCain was flustered and asking this guy, what on earth are you saying! Abizaid sounded like a tyical politician in the mold of Stephen Hadley or Tony Snow rather than a 4-star General in charge of troops. Obviously, Abizaid is thinking about his professional career when he retires, much like Tommy Franks was when he supported Bush against Kerry in '04.

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 12:38pm

11. CRABWALK,

    It's too late for that. Imperial ambitions will always be fought against. The warw has already been won as I outlined. Time to withdraw, pure and simple..................

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 12:42pm

12. JM, as a libertarian (And I am a recovering one BTW) do you not see Iraq as just that, a libertarian society? No regs, no taxes, private militia and services.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 12:43pm

13. SeaGod, while I agree that much has been squandered, I could get behind one last REAL push to make the neo-con utopia theory succeed. I would be willing to eat my words if we actually left Iraq better than we bombed it. if we had the troops needed, I think the fatalities may actually decrease. Plus then chimpy could say something like "We were never stay the course".

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 12:48pm

14. Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/17/2006 @ 12:30am

    FRANK, I was addressing your statement....which SEEMED to imply that democracy is NOT the best form of government for Iraq or the Iraqi people.

    Was I wrong in that assumption?

    Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 12:49pm

15. CRABWALK,

    Do try to keep up, Lad/Lass.............(LOL)-Posted by POSEIDON 11/17/2006 @ 12:47am

    You are the seagod, I am but a lowly crustacean laddy, side stepping my way through the debate.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 12:52pm

16. CRABWALK,

    Me sort it out! Put my head on the chopping block! Thanks a lot, there friend!(LOL)

    Seriously speaking, withdrawal should begin now. If the Iraqis wish to spend their newfound freedom from Saddam by killing each other rather than cutting a deal, that is their choice. We can not stop this civil war nor is it our job to try and stop it, try as we might.

    Or begin phased withdrawal, end date Dec 07. Let Poseidon sort em out.

    Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006 @ 12:37am | ignore this person

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 12:53pm

17. Was I wrong in that assumption?

    Posted by MASK 11/17/2006 @ 12:49am

    No, but I gotta run.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/17/2006 @ 12:56am

    Okaaaaaaaaay??!?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 1:00pm

18. CRABWALK,

    Reps. and Dems. argue in circles, as stupid as it is. They complain that the Iraqis are not doing enough to save their own country, which they are not, but then they aruge that there should be no consequences or penalties for Iraqi failure, such as withdrawal of American troops, etc. That is like the criminal justice system law enforcement agencies, courts, prisons and all taking a permanent vacation from public service but then making a clarion call for all criminals and would be criminals to refrain from engaging in any and all criminal activities .............

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 1:02pm

19. Or begin phased withdrawal, end date Dec 07. Let Poseidon sort em out.

    Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006

    You, Neptune, Zeus, Aphrodite, Mars, Yaway, Jehovah, Monkey God, Ganesh. Whoever the hell is actually in charge.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 1:04pm

20. CRABWALK,

    I am completely disappointed in you, CRABWALK. Do you not recognize that these people do not wish to be occupied by a foreign power, much less an American one? Grasping at straws with this so-called last push is pure vanity. Americans simply want to say that we left on our terms and not anyone else's. It is wrong. You know just like I know that leaving is the only true option left. Why not get behind that option and saving lives in the process.

    You tell me what is supposed to be accomplished with this so-called last push?

    SeaGod, while I agree that much has been squandered, I could get behind one last REAL push to make the neo-con utopia theory succeed. I would be willing to eat my words if we actually left Iraq better than we bombed it. if we had the troops needed, I think the fatalities may actually decrease. Plus then chimpy could say something like "We were never stay the course".

    Posted by CRABWALK

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 1:07pm

21. CRABWALK,

    I am completely disappointed in you, CRABWALK.-Poseidon

    Join a long line, it starts with my MIL.

    I am a firm believer in doing things right. Chimpy did not start it correctly, and has failed along the way. I do think that a stablel Iraq is better than a failed one. If we continue along the same path we will leave a failed state. That is why I say go in strong or come home.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 1:15pm

22. What hsuB wants:

    By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent Fri Nov 17, 4:22 AM ET

    HANOI, Vietnam - President Bush said Friday the United States' unsuccessful war in Vietnam three decades ago offered lessons for the American-led struggle in Iraq. "We'll succeed unless we quit," Bush said shortly after arriving in this one-time war capital.

    XXXXXXXXXXXXX

    What the 'people' want:

    Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Nov. 9-12, 2006. N=1,479 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).

    "Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force against Iraq?"

    Date_________Right Decision__Wrong Decision__Unsure

    11/9-12/06___________41_________51___________8

    10/17-22/06__________43_________47__________10

    9/21 - 10/4/06________45_________47___________8

    6/14-19/06___________49_________44___________7

    XXXXXXXX

    And what the people have been wanting for a long time:

    Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs. Nov. 13-15, 2006. N=1,000 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1. Data from 11/03 and earlier co-sponsored by Cook Political Report.

    "Generally speaking, would you say things in this country are heading in the right direction, or are they off on the wrong track?"

    Date___Right Direction___Wrong Track___Unsure

    11/13-15/06______34_________61________5

    11/7-9/05________32_________64________4

    11/3-5/04________46_________51________3

    11/18-20/03______38_________56________6

    Posted by hsuBfools at 11/17/2006 @ 1:17pm

23. And what hsuB is determined to give us and the world:

    Year ___Vietnam US dead __________Year __Iraq US dead

    1961-65____1864_______________2003-06____2965

    1966_______6053________________2007____14,829

    1967______11,058________________2008____27,731

    1968______16,511________________2009____42,983

    1969______11,527________________2010____30,088

    1970_______6065________________2011____15,645

    1971_______2348________________2012_____5476

    1972________561________________2013_____1314

    TOTALS

    KIA_____58,191_______________________141,031

    WIA___153,303_______________________375,142

    MIA_____2338__________________________5641

    South Vietnamese _____________________Iraqis

    KIA___230,000______________________611,800

    WIA__300,000______________________798,000

    North Vietnamese __________________ Insurgency

    KIA__1,100,000____________________2.926,000

    WIA__600,000____________________1,596,000

    Total Civilians Killed

    2-4,000,000______________________5-10,000,000

    Posted by hsuBfools at 11/17/2006 @ 1:19pm

24. CRABWALK,

    MILs can be fun, if you know how to coax, coddle, and manipulate them!

    McCain's logic I see! I understand where you are coming from. But it is too late for that. Why? Because the Iraqis are at a stage in their development where they have to sort this out for themselves. Do they want a continued bloodbath or will they be smart enough to cut a deal? That is the 64,000 question that no one is asking. All people seem to be asking themselves is what can America do to make these people live together. It is not up to us! We can't want peace more than they do! By continuing on this misguided path we are keep ourselves in an endless quagmire that is killing good people. Don't fall for that misguided thinking. It is a false choice! You speak of chimpy (obviously Bush) but you have now signed on to his imperial mission. Can't call the kettle black if you have the same position as he and McCain. As I outlined the war has already been won.

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 1:24pm

25. All,

    Well, ladies and gentlemen, time to sign off. I must apply for my passport so I can get to planet Neptune prior to planetary armegeddon! Have a nice weekend all and remember, there is no logical reason to continue this failed war except VANITY........

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 1:29pm

26. Thank goodness the democrats can manage the Iraq war better now! And we even have a choice now between the DLC's "strategic redeployment" and Murtha's Airwar Plan! Isn't that wonderful? Soon we'll all be able to go back to sleep. I just hope none of those darn protesters start making any demands! I know how annoying that is to those superior beltway pundits at The Nation.

    Posted by AlanSmithee at 11/17/2006 @ 1:34pm

27. McCain's logic I see!-Seagod

    Oooh, below the belt. Ouch!

    Nationalistic vanity has long been an American vice.

    And Rapture is such a more pleasant term than Armageddon. But now I am just picking a fight.

    Peace-Crab.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 1:35pm

28. Oh, I forgot, it's "antiwar" Murtha's "antiwar" Airwar Plan. 'Cause it's "antiwar" ya see. Don't forget to spin it that way.

    Posted by AlanSmithee at 11/17/2006 @ 1:35pm

29. ALAN, glad to see you find humor in the dems attempt to save chimpies ass, 'cuz the repubes had 3+ years to do it. And FAILED.

    Humor is the best medicine, take a dozen every day, with alchohol.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 1:38pm

30. John Maasch, if a man, however well intentioned, managed to botch a job so badly that all the other participants were impoverished by his actions, and driven to vengeful madness against this individual, where he to quit doing them and to leave the area, would that be cutting and running? We owe the Iraqis reparations, not something as contraproductive as our presence. And everyone says our presence is contraproductive. This should have been a UN police action, or frankly, not done at all, we should fund this as a UN action.

    Posted by brantl at 11/17/2006 @ 1:51pm

31. we should fund this as a UN action.

    Posted by BRANTL 11/17/2006 @ 1:51pm | ignore this person

    How about actually FUNDING it period?

    Why should future generations foot the bill for a war our GENERATION chose?

    Penatagon is now asking for $127-160 billion MORE for 2007 Iraq venture (on top of the $70B already approved for 2007).

    Does anyone think we'd be still in Iraq if the country club set's taxes were actually paying the bill????

    Posted by freedomplease at 11/17/2006 @ 2:30pm

32. Rio,

    The Pentagon asked for $127-160B EXTRA for 2007. If it was MY money I'd be pissed. But, hey since it's my kids money I'll just tee off at the Country Club instead!!!

    Posted by freedomplease at 11/17/2006 @ 3:07pm

33. Yeah Rio, your plan has worked so well.

    Peace in the ME is just around the corner. And the cow jumped over the moon, the fork lay down with the spoon.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 3:13pm

34. Posted by FREEDOMPLEASE 11/17/2006 @ 3:07pm

    The line at Tee one is pretty deep, with all the war profiteers joing the CC. Or are you writing about the newly constructed CC's in Iraq, the land of milk and honey? Where a purple finger was a beacon for peace, prosperity and democracy.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 3:17pm

35. and the Democrats try to choke off funding for the war or attempt to impose legislative mandates upon the commander in chief?"

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 11/17/2006 @ 2:44pm

    I'm sorry, RIO...but aside from Dennis Kucinich (who's still waiting on ground-breaking to start for his "Department of Peace")....what Democrats have been talking about cutting off funds to the troops in Iraq?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 3:20pm

36. Poseidon, I know your domain is the Sea, but could you push a swell up the RioCowardo in order to disinfect it with your cleansing waters?

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 3:23pm

37. CRABWALK,

    Don't be so sensitive! McCain is only doing what he feels needs to be done, tack to the far right in order to win the GOP primary. Can't blame him for that..............

    My point being that this vice of nationalistic vanity and religious fanaticism finally take a back seat to what is really in the nation's best interest. And pick a fight with the religious right you have...............

    ------------------------------------------------------------------ McCain's logic I see!-Seagod

    Oooh, below the belt. Ouch!

    Nationalistic vanity has long been an American vice.

    And Rapture is such a more pleasant term than Armageddon. But now I am just picking a fight.

    Peace-Crab.

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 3:53pm

38. Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006 @ 1:38pm

    Don't mind if I do...

    Posted by AlanSmithee at 11/17/2006 @ 3:55pm

39. RIO BRAVO,

    Let's see, a solution to cut-off funding, which will force Bush to bring troops out of Iraq, or the rightwing lunatic approach which leaves them there indefinitely to be killed at a slow and steady pace. Well, it doesn't take a genius to see which proposition makes the most sense. The war has already been won. It is only the sheer arrogance of the War party (Dems/Reps) who believe that the United States is lord, master, and ruler of the Earth that keeps us in Iraq indefinitely..................

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 3:57pm

40. CRABWALK,

    Not able to on this one. Courage comes from within, not from without. Rio Bravo and others are always brave............with other peoples' lives. I agree with Bill Maher on this proposition, those who support the war should be the first to go. If that was the "NEW RULE" you would see rightwing support for this war drop in a hurry, faster than bad habits and subzero temperatures.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------- Poseidon, I know your domain is the Sea, but could you push a swell up the RioCowardo in order to disinfect it with your cleansing waters?

    Posted by CRABWALK

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 4:00pm

41. RIO,

    Though you refuse to admit that the US has already lost the war in Iraq, I'd be curious to know just how you believe "victory" could be achieved.

    Posted by chimichenga at 11/17/2006 @ 4:02pm

42. CHIMICHENGA,

    Not, so. The war has already been won.........

    1. Sadam in prison waiting to be hanged, check 2. Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction, check, 3. Iraq poses no threat to the U.S. and Israel, check 4. Iraq has been liberated from Saddam's terror reign, check

    All objectives have been accomplished. Time to withdraw and let them sort out their own fate. Will the Iraqis drown in a sea of their own blood or will they smarten up and cut a deal..........

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 4:18pm

43. Cut and run away from our responsibility.

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 11/17/2006 @ 12:11am | ignore this person

    which is what?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 4:23pm

44. Little poll amongst the bloggers here...

    What specific proposal WILL the Democrats propose or pressure Bush into implementing...and when?

    Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 4:25pm

45. Crab" I could get behind one last REAL push to make the neo-con utopia theory succeed.":

    unbelievable. who has been writing your posts? you certainly had me fooled.

    this war was and is Dead on Arrival, sorry pun intended.NOTHING will resurrect this corpse. It's time to stop throwing good money and lives after those lost. get out now. GET OUT NOW. no equivocating, GET THE HELL OUT NOW. that is what I voted for last tuesday. what did you vote for?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 4:29pm

46. The optimism of the credulous has been something to behold over the last couple of weeks. Now for the reality: The Democrats are about as likely to take the clear voice of the American people respecting the war and do anything more positive with it than Tom Lantos has over the last five years. The myth of two-party government dies hard. Here's a link that'll provide some truth-telling:

    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/

    John Lowell

    Posted by john lowell at 11/17/2006 @ 4:31pm

47. That is why I say go in strong or come home.

    Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006 @ 1:15pm | ignore this person

    I've got it, you're John McCain

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 4:32pm

48. I could get behind one last REAL push to make the neo-con utopia theory succeed. I would be willing to eat my words if we actually left Iraq better than we bombed it. if we had the troops needed, I think the fatalities may actually decrease. Plus then chimpy could say something like "We were never stay the course".

    Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006 @ 12:48am

    You're advocating more conflict and murder with the blood on our hands.

    Leave.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/17/2006 @ 4:46pm

49. No, but I gotta run.

    Posted by MASK 11/17/2006 @ 12:49am

    Squeak, squeak, squeak . . .

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/17/2006 @ 4:48pm

50. POSEIDON,

    Please tell me you jest, for if you do not I'd be liable to think you've got your trident stuck in your cerebrum. To even consider equating with victory what the US has done to Iraq, international law, the horrified world population and its own esteem is to admit a monstruous leap into the depths of quackery and barbarity. By your standards you could just as easily claim the Sandinistas aim to eclipse the American Astro with its paper aresenal while corrupting Honduras and Costa Rica with literacy campaigns and co-ops, thus justifying another deliverance from evil a la Contra, then plan parades for drubbing a nation of impoverished farmers who want nothing to do with threatening a colossal neighbor, but rather to pull themselves out of a life of need, hunger and ignorance.

    It's easy to claim victory in war when the conditions which allegedly provoked the war turn out to be completely false if not contrived all together.

    Posted by chimichenga at 11/17/2006 @ 4:54pm

51. I am a firm believer in doing things right. Chimpy did not start it correctly, and has failed along the way. I do think that a stablel Iraq is better than a failed one. If we continue along the same path we will leave a failed state. That is why I say go in strong or come home.

    Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006 @ 1:15pm

    Doing things right would mean not invading and occupying other countries for no legitimate reason.

    Whatever happens when we leave is going to happen when we leave regardless of when we leave.

    Do you think of yourself as the white Bwana who is going to set the natives right? They were civilized long before we were. They're responsible for much of the enlightenment in western Europe. They don't need our brutal, egotistical, self-serving asses over there.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/17/2006 @ 4:56pm

52. By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent Fri Nov 17, 4:22 AM ET

    HANOI, Vietnam - President Bush said Friday the United States' unsuccessful war in Vietnam three decades ago offered lessons for the American-led struggle in Iraq. "We'll succeed unless we quit," Bush said shortly after arriving in this one-time war capital.

    Great diplomacy from the village idiot. He goes to Vietnam and says we should have continued the war that destroyed the lives of two million of them. Which, of course, the spoiled-upbringing coward didn't want to get anywhere near when the bullets were flying. What a sack of rotting flesh.

    When do we get pictures of anus-brain in Vietnam in someone else's flightsuit in front of a big banner that says, "SERVING IN VIETNAM"?

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/17/2006 @ 5:07pm

53. I have to wonder about the pride of the Vietnamese people, for how in God's name could you put on such a jubilee for the leader of a nation that aimed to send your land (and region) back to the Stone Age? Have they been domesticated that much that they can't even speak up and say, "No thanks, there's nothing you can do to make us have anything close to respect for you, especially seeing as how you've continued to bomb and blast the world back in time since you left here 30 years ago." Or are they that dependent upon us after the noble annihilation we unleashed upon them that not only will they fork over the time and labor of their children in order to produce McDonalds Happy Meal toys and other important products, but they'll also swallow their pride and give a welcome to one of the world's least favorite people, and symbol of their nation's worst nightmare?

    Posted by chimichenga at 11/17/2006 @ 5:20pm

54. I've got it, you're John McCain

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/17/2006

    Twice today! You guys are going low. Although you could have called me Hillary. That would have hurt.

    Maybe I have never posted my whole thought process on this. The way it has been run is a shambles. If that is going to be our stategery then we should bring em home. Do I honestly think the other path, a REAL push, will happen? Not really. I don't think the troops are there to do it. Thats why I said "if the troops can be found and trained". I think we are passed that point, like Poseiden wrote.

    "Doing things right would mean not invading and occupying other countries for no legitimate reason"-RED

    I agree 100%. I protested against this ill-fated illegal war before day one. Because I did not think it rose to the const. level required and I was pretty sure Chimpy, Birdshot and Rummy would fuck it up. Then when they went in fast and loose, I was pretty sure it was doomed.

    "You're advocating more conflict and murder with the blood on our hands."RED.

    No, I am advocating 2 courses. One of which calls for an overwhelming show of force in the areas of rebuilding. Then leave.

    "Do you think of yourself as the white Bwana who is going to set the natives right? They were civilized long before we were. They're responsible for much of the enlightenment in western Europe. They don't need our brutal, egotistical, self-serving asses over there."-RED

    hehe. Me smart White Father, you dumb A-rab. NO I don't think of myself that way, nor am I condoning a condescending approach. I am saying build hospitals, water plants and schools, then leave. Let the Iraqis handle policing and counter-insurgency. Our guys would huddle up around the construction. They already sit like quail on a VP "hunting" trip, harden sites and hold them. Don't practice Vietnam style tactics. Then let the Iraqis sort out the guvt. (This is a simplistic form of my argument, I am waiting for some things to cool before I can handle them, a fly by)

    I've been wrong before, I may be wrong this time. This may come as a suprise, but I aren't perfekt. My first choice would to be give Maliki six months to get his dung together, then begin to bring em home.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 5:27pm

55. Chimi, Ho Chi Minh fought the Japanese, he admired america and its constitution. imagine his surprise when he was cheated on the promised elections. the vietnamese should be applauded, if France and Germany can get along after centuries of war, finally, why should the vietnamese be anything but applauded. we didn't even acknowledge that china exists, let alone talk to them, until Nixon. we cannot keep fighting over the same grudges.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 5:30pm

56. Posted by CHIMICHENGA 11/17/2006 @ 5:20pm

    Kind of bizarre, isn't it. Buddhist philosophy?

    Chimpy wants to do business with more communists, forgetting we fought a 40 year cold war against them. His rational is to undermine the American worker, bidding for the lowest cost worker he can find.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 5:31pm

57. Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/17/2006 @ 5:30pm

    Your'e right. Still amazing to see them put on such a show for Chimpy, of all primates.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 5:33pm

58. Crab,

    don't let a little ribbing get to you.

    what are you suggesting? that we revisit the cold war? I don't get you at all today.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 5:35pm

59. Still amazing to see them put on such a show for Chimpy, of all primates.

    they were much more enthusiastic for Clinton. in this case, they know that Bush will be gone, the US will be around much longer. maybe they read the election results.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 5:37pm

60. Crab,

    don't let a little ribbing get to you.-JR

    I like it , actually. Tickles.

    NO, John, I am just tired of competing with $1/day labor. Till the commies get their labor and enviro houses in order and hold free elections, we should NOT be giving them favored status. We can do business with them, talk to them, listen to them. But they should pay tariffs. I can't compete the way it's going, and I cannot outsource myself.

    Like I've said, I hold paradoxical (hypocritical?) views in my own head sometimes. But I'm pretty, so I can gat away with it.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 5:41pm

61. Been here too long already, catch you this eve?

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 5:43pm

62. I don't think that asking for a withdrawl from Iraq is too much to ask.

    I also don't think it's going to happen anytime soon as long as George W. Bush is still the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

    I believe that the folks in Iraq should be left to govern their own country. But then again, I thought that back in 2003 when we invaded. I also thought that if the Bush administration (and I'm talkin' Bush the dad not Bush the son) were really serious about giving Iraqis a government without Saddam Hussein, they'd have helped the Kurds and Hussein's opposition when they wanted to take him out in 1991.

    Instead, they decided, in the words of the Republicans, to cut and run. I guess they felt that since he was THEIR dictator, that it was okay if he stayed. Of course, all of the people he went on to kill might have had a thing or two to say about that had they been asked......

    I'm still trying to figure out why we're there. Is it oil? Is it payback for Hussein wanting to take out Bush the dad? Is it just because Bush the son wanted to prove that his mama didn't have his nuts in a jar? It certainly wasn't WMD's, although we knew Hussein had them at one time because Rumsfeld still had the receipts.

    If someone could tell me, I'd appreciate it.

    But then again, someone might have to tell them.

    Posted by edwriter at 11/17/2006 @ 5:47pm

63. Crab, the two remaining commie nations are by no means the only obnes offering cheap labor. you are conflating two issues. the cheap labor issue has nothing to do with commie nations per se.

    according to Marx, capitalism needs to constantly find cheaper labor and cheaper commodities in order to survive.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 5:50pm

64. Ed, as long as the US has their thumb on the scales in the form of hundreds of thousands of troops there will be no equitable settlement in Iraq.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 5:51pm

65. So, once again, what happens in Las Vegas, stays in Las Vegas....

    Do you think it harms the Democrats that Nancy Pelosi backed John Murtha for majority leader?

    Yes___________22%

    No____________78%

    Total Votes: 3536

    http://www.capitalnews.org/

    Posted by hsuBfools at 11/17/2006 @ 6:23pm

66. Ha, and then he says he wants Iraq to be worse than Vietnam by not quiting at 58,000 dead troops and 2-4 million civilians killed! hsuB is so backwards he doesn't even realize he's spouting bizarre nonsense and just puts a spotlight on his own cowardice.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 11/17/2006 @ 6:34pm

67. They were civilized long before we were. They're responsible for much of the enlightenment in western Europe. They don't need our brutal, egotistical, self-serving asses over there.

    Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/17/2006 @ 4:56pm

    A very interesting definition of "civilised" birdie. Perhaps they exported too much of the Enlightenment to Europe. Sort of emptied the barrel. They may have done better keeping a bit of it at home in places like Iraq for use in the 20th and 21st centuries.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 11/17/2006 @ 6:49pm

68. Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/17/2006 @ 6:26pm

    You don't seem to have any access to Asian news over in the old isolated US.

    Dubya is a great hero in Asia. Not because of any bloody war but because of his free trade credentials. You blokes really are neanderthals. Got to move fast to keep up with George W. The new mantra for the ME will be free trade (and democracy). The Asians love the first part, at least, and no doubt the Arabs will too in time.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 11/17/2006 @ 6:58pm

69. I am saying build hospitals, water plants and schools, then leave. Let the Iraqis handle policing and counter-insurgency. Our guys would huddle up around the construction. They already sit like quail on a VP "hunting" trip, harden sites and hold them. Don't practice Vietnam style tactics. Then let the Iraqis sort out the guvt. (This is a simplistic form of my argument, I am waiting for some things to cool before I can handle them, a fly by)

    Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006 @ 5:27pm

    This is what we've been doing for 3 1/2 years. If you mean huddle up even more than they already are then what's the point of being there? They don't want us there.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/17/2006 @ 7:14pm

70. I'm still trying to figure out why we're there. Is it oil? Is it payback for Hussein wanting to take out Bush the dad? Is it just because Bush the son wanted to prove that his mama didn't have his nuts in a jar? It certainly wasn't WMD's, although we knew Hussein had them at one time because Rumsfeld still had the receipts.

    If someone could tell me, I'd appreciate it.

    Posted by EDWRITER 11/17/2006 @ 5:47pm

    Oil, israel, the military industrial complex, and a compelling theme for Bush's Presidency.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/17/2006 @ 7:23pm

71. Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/17/2006 @ 7:14pm |

    No, this is what Chimps been been trying to do, and failing.

    ______

    JR, yes I conflated, Pardon the smell. There are definitely more countries in the race to the bottom. Free Trade ain't free.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/17/2006 @ 7:33pm

72. you know, its friday night, the dems won the legislature, my fiance is hot, works going well, and i am comfortably numb. life is good.

    but some poor kid is still scared shitless fighting this evil, idiotic war. not good.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/17/2006 @ 7:46pm

73. the celebrities on jeopardy tonight are dumb as bricks. its like that snl skit.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/17/2006 @ 7:50pm

74. but some poor kid is still scared shitless fighting this evil, idiotic war. not good.

    Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 11/17/2006 @ 7:46pm |

    that kid should be in college...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/17/2006 @ 7:53pm

75. what kerry said was a golden foot in the mouth - it was true, and most people knew it...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/17/2006 @ 7:55pm

76. Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/17/2006 @ 4:48pm |

    See...I KNEW you were LYING about putting me on "Ignore"!

    (among many things!)

    Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 8:36pm

77. he proceeded to avoid a physical that would have shown his alcholism and or cocaine use.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/17/2006 @ 9:48pm

    FRANK, curious....has that been proven? or is it just the mirror-image of "Swift Boating"?

    Posted by Mask at 11/17/2006 @ 9:51pm

78. Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/17/2006 @ 7:14pm

    No, this is what Chimps been been trying to do, and failing.

    Posted by CRABWALK 11/17/2006 @ 7:33pm

    The Democrats will occupy Iraq better? You're wrong. Even complete morons like the neocons could have succeeded if the Iraqis had been agreeable to a foreign military occupation of their country. The Democrats aren't going to do any better because the Iraqis do not want us there regardless of whether or not you think the Democrats are geniuses. And they aren't. They have the same imperialist outlook as the Republicans. The occupation is doomed.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/17/2006 @ 9:54pm

79. Frank, did you ever serve???

    Posted by ACook at 11/17/2006 @ 10:02pm

80. If the democrats were smart, as one of their first orders of business they would completely fund the US withdraw from Iraq and keep the funds in escrow.

    That way when they finally say no to the chimp and cut off further funding for the quagmire, they can't be accused of not supporting the troops.

    They've already put the cash aside for the ticket home.

    Posted by Will C. at 11/17/2006 @ 10:45pm

81. the arabs had very little to do with the Enlightenment, the Renaissance yes, but the Enlightenment was a western european and jewish affair.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 10:47pm

82. it'll also make for a nice fight. Any resistance to the bill from the hamsters and the chimp and they get to demonstrate to the country that the republican party has no intention of ever leaving Iraq

    Posted by Will C. at 11/17/2006 @ 10:48pm

83. CHIMICHENGA,

    Trying to catch up everybody. Great dialogue. I am afraid that my Trident is on full power. My thought processes are very unique. As for CRABWALK, he/she is honest, and should be commended for being so. I can assure you that my Trident has not gone amok. As for my position on the Iraq war, we should leave now because there is no reason for us to stay there. All objectives have been accomplished. Now, have horrors also occured? You betcha. But that doesn't mean that NOTHING WORTHWHILE WAS ACCOMPLISHED. It has. We simply have to build upon that by withdrawing troops and letting the Iraqis rebuild their own society.

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 11:04pm

84. CRABWALK,

    As for the McCain stuff, we didn't not mean it!(LOL) Seriously: Actually, being able to hold two opposing points of view in mind is the greatest strength a human can have. Too bad most of the world can't do that!

    Posted by POSEIDON at 11/17/2006 @ 11:09pm

85. by the time of the Enlightenment the arab culture, which by that time was Ottoman, was in decline. they reached the gates of Vienna but were turned back. the dismemberment of the Ottoman empire began then and continued until after WW1, when Attaturk dragged his country into modernity, they washed their hands of the arabs.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 11:12pm

86. Pos, I wouldn't overdue the god of the sea stuff. it don't got legs.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 11:14pm

87. Posi:' But that doesn't mean that NOTHING WORTHWHILE WAS ACCOMPLISHED. It has."

    no it hasn't. we have destroyed a country, albeit one held together by barely a thread. Saddam would have tumbled sooner or later. the A word has yet to be mentioned. allow me to be the first. the Iraq tragedy could have been A-voided.we could have listened to the Germans and the French, as well as many others. Blair and Bush will forever go down in infamy, as they have the blood of hundreds of thousands on their hands. let this be the death knell of imperialism.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/17/2006 @ 11:18pm

88. the arabs had very little to do with the Enlightenment, the Renaissance yes, but the Enlightenment was a western european and jewish affair.

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/17/2006 @ 10:47pm

    I meant to say renaissance. The enlightenment was due mostly to non-Jews. Why do you mention them separately from Europeans? Weren't they European? You didn't differentiate between Protestants and Catholics.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/18/2006 @ 12:24am

89. Posted by WILL C. 11/17/2006 @ 10:45pm

    I think the investigations into war profiteering and the return of the pilfered funds will more than pay for the redeployment and have a little left to fund hsuB's impeachment costs...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 12:27am

90. by the time of the Enlightenment the arab culture, which by that time was Ottoman, was in decline. they reached the gates of Vienna but were turned back. the dismemberment of the Ottoman empire began then and continued until after WW1, when Attaturk dragged his country into modernity, they washed their hands of the arabs.

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/17/2006 @ 11:12pm

    Turkey isn't nearly as modern as you make it out to be. Several Arab countries are more modern.

    Do you think of Arabs as dirty? Why do you say, "washed their hands of the Arabs"?

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/18/2006 @ 12:27am

91. Do you think of Arabs as dirty? Why do you say, "washed their hands of the Arabs"?

    Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/18/2006 @ 12:27am

    I believe that the expression to 'wash one's hands of ...' refers to Pontius Pilate's actions at the trial of Jesus

    (to those who hold that no such event happened, I am pointing out the origin of a common figure of speach, not commenting on it's historical authenticity)

    Posted by skeletonman at 11/18/2006 @ 12:35am

92. It just gets better:

    Do you think it harms the Democrats that Nancy Pelosi backed John Murtha for majority leader?

    Yes___________10%

    No____________90%

    Total Votes: 14018

    Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 12:36am

93. David, you asked, "[C]an the United States rebuild Iraq and remake its security forces while intense sectarian conflict is under way? And can it do so while removing troops?"

    I answer: Why not? Removing our troops (and the bungling American and other foreign contractors) doesn't mean we remove our money. We owe Iraq reparations big time. Once we have removed our troops and allowed the nascent (and unfortunately now inevitable) Iraq civil war to run its course, we can send in money and materials to help the government set up by the survivors to rebuild their country -- but we must keep our troops out, and our Halliburtons and Bechtels as well. We must let the Iraqis determine their own course of reconstruction using out money; certainly their graft won't be any worse than the war profiteering that has already been committed by our corporations.

    Posted by tombetz at 11/18/2006 @ 01:48am

94. Do you think of Arabs as dirty? Why do you say, "washed their hands of the Arabs"?

    Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/18/2006 @ 12:27am

    I believe that the expression to 'wash one's hands of ...' refers to Pontius Pilate's actions at the trial of Jesus

    Posted by SKELETONMAN 11/18/2006 @ 12:35am

    That would only make sense in the context used if the Ottoman Turks had sent the Arabs to be crucified, figuratively or otherwise. They didn't, so the "washed their hands of the arabs" must have another context.

    . . the dismemberment of the Ottoman empire began then and continued until after WW1, when Attaturk dragged his country into modernity, they washed their hands of the arabs.

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/17/2006 @ 11:12pm

    The implication is that Arabs are dirty. Even if used figuratively it implies that the Arabs are to be shunned. That is additionally non-sensical because the Turks did not "wash their hands of the Arabs". The Arabs revolted against the Turks and became independent of the Ottoman Empire. That is the last thing the Turks wanted. It was a fait accompli by 1918, about five years before Ataturk's program of secularization was instituted. So not only is the term "wash their hands of the Arabs" used in a demeaning manner, history was rewritten with hammer and tongs to make it seem to have a context. There's something peculiar about that.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/18/2006 @ 03:01am

95. good point, Skeleton. the figure of speech is so common that I did not remember the origin of it, isn't that often the case.

    the less said about the raving poster who tried to make an issue of it, the better.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 06:46am

96. Would have been proven if the records weren't all destroyed but that's old news.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/17/2006 @ 9:54pm

    FRANK, I have proof that aliens killed Elvis, but all the records were destroyed!

    Posted by Mask at 11/18/2006 @ 07:24am

97. Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/18/2006 @ 12:36am |

    HSUB, is that part of that Pew Center poll....or an online poll?

    Posted by Mask at 11/18/2006 @ 07:25am

98. I wish The Nation would quit discussing the options of the Dems and begin a strong campaign, as relentless and militant as we see in the pages of The American Conservative (amconmag.com) to end the War now. Chit-chatting with Reid is worthless unless his hypocrisy on the war is exposed.

    We need calls for demonstrations at the DCCC and sitdowns in the halls of Congress - as well as serious plans for a Third Party effort in 2008 since the Dem betrayal was carried out even before the election (See: http://www.counterpunch.com/walsh11112006.html).

    john v. walsh

    Posted by jvwalshmd1 at 11/18/2006 @ 09:08am

99. good point, Skeleton. the figure of speech is so common that I did not remember the origin of it, isn't that often the case.

    the less said about the raving poster who tried to make an issue of it, the better.

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/18/2006 @ 06:46am

    You have prejudicial and bigoted attitudes toward Arabs but don't want anyone to mention it while you act like anyone who believes Palestinians have a right to return to their homes and land is "raving" even though it's been a fundamental international human rights principle in the civilized world for going on a century.

    You also have a habit of turning history into an anti-Arab fairy tale.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/18/2006 @ 10:56am

100. from Durants' "The story of civilization" vol X: apropos Islam in the 18th century:

     the clergy had won the battle against the scientists, philosophers and historians who had prospered in medieval Islam; astronomy had relapsed into astrology, chemistry into alchemy, medicine into magic, history into myth.

     also:

     The Sunni and Shia sects divided Islam, as Catholicism and Protestantism divided Western Christianity; in the eighteenth century a new sect was founded by Mohammad ibn-abd-al-Wahab, a sheik of the Nejd-that central plateau which we now know as Saudi Arabia. The Wahabites were the Puritans of Islam: they condemned the worship of saints, destroyed the tombs and shrines of saints and martyrs, denounced the wearing of silk and the use of tobacco, and defended the right of each individual to interpret the Koran for himself.

     this eleven volume series is very highly recommended, it goes up to the age of Napoleon. a life's work for the authors, a husband and wife team. a must read.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 11:02am

101. JOHANNESROLF,

     I must slightly disagree with you. Worthwhile accomplishments have been met. Yes, Bush and Blair, when history judges them, will go down in infamy for how they did things in Iraq more so than what they did. Saddam was in power for over 35 years. He would have died in office before being toppled from within. Although he was despised, he kept order and he kept the lights on. That's count for a great deal in Iraqi society. But as most people have not noted, I think the civil war would have happened anyway when Saddam died because who would have taken over for him in the end? I think the time has come for the Iraqis to put their religious differences aside and cut a deal. They have this historic opportunity. Let's see if they use it.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 11:29am

102. JVWALSHMD1,

     The anti-war movement, if there is still such a thing in this country, should wage a war of their own as soon as the Democrats open up on Capitol Hill in the Majority. As soon as that January session of Congress begins with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi at the helm, that is when the movement should begin its campaign to end the war. If they do not, then they will get more of the same, and exactly what they deserve.

     I wish The Nation would quit discussing the options of the Dems and begin a strong campaign, as relentless and militant as we see in the pages of The American Conservative (amconmag.com) to end the War now. Chit-chatting with Reid is worthless unless his hypocrisy on the war is exposed.

     We need calls for demonstrations at the DCCC and sitdowns in the halls of Congress - as well as serious plans for a Third Party effort in 2008 since the Dem betrayal was carried out even before the election (See: http://www.counterpunch.com/walsh11112006.html).

     john v. walsh

     Posted by JVWALSHMD1

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 11:33am

103. from Durants' "The story of civilization" vol X: apropos Islam in the 18th century:

     the clergy had won the battle against the scientists, philosophers and historians who had prospered in medieval Islam; astronomy had relapsed into astrology, chemistry into alchemy, medicine into magic, history into myth.

     Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/18/2006 @ 11:02am

     JOHANNESROLF, do you really want to publicly say that Muslims (and by imputation, Arabs) are astrologers, alchemists, and magicians?

     I think simple common sense will tell others that is a bizarre assertion.

     Quoting a historian from many years ago who dealt with the Islamic world from a narrowminded, Western European perspective only further reveals your intent.

     The assertion that "history became myth" is an accurate description of the manner in which israel handles history so your "modernizing" impulse could be much more productively applied to others in the current era. Not likely you will, though, because you shop for history references that are sufficiently anti-Arab and non-truthful enough about israel (usually by leaving out history) to suit your apriori anti-Arab bias.

     If Muslims are "astrologers, alchemists, and magicians" why does the "West" have it's panties all in a bunch because they seem to be able to develop nuclear technology against all efforts of that "West" to highhandedly block their access to a wide range of technological resources?

     By your use of Durant's characterization of Muslims as "astrologers, alchemists, and magicians" you are now admitting that your term "washed their hands of the arabs" had a disparaging intent. It's quite striking how you suddenly swung into action with "history" and cultural comments simply because I said something that was marginally complementary to Arab culture and history. And you describe me as "raving".

     Posted by fromredbird at 11/18/2006 @ 11:41am

104. The anti-war movement, if there is still such a thing in this country, should wage a war of their own as soon as the Democrats open up on Capitol Hill in the Majority. As soon as that January session of Congress begins with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi at the helm, that is when the movement should begin its campaign to end the war. If they do not, then they will get more of the same, and exactly what they deserve.

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/18/2006 @ 11:33am

     You're absoutely right. It's imperative or else there will be a continuation of the occupation under the rubric of "we're trying to get out". That excuse could be used to continue the occupation for decades.

     Posted by fromredbird at 11/18/2006 @ 11:48am

105. We owe Iraq reparations big time.

     Posted by TOMBETZ 11/18/2006 @ 01:48am

     The "R" word that can be expected to give both "conservatives" and "liberals" high blood pressure.

     Posted by fromredbird at 11/18/2006 @ 11:51am

106. Worthwhile accomplishments have been met

     perhaps you could enumerate them. the thing about Saddam to remember is that the Baath party ruled Iraq. Saddam was vulnerable from within that party. had he died no doubt another Baath party leader would have emerged. the Shia would not have come to power in that event, if history is any guide. that is why it is my belief that absent the US and British troops, Iraq will again be ruled by Baathists. in other words, when we pull out the "unity" gov't is toast. if they're so unity why the endless spiral of civil war?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 12:04pm

107. Pos, I think the time has come for the Iraqis to put their religious differences aside and cut a deal. They have this historic opportunity. Let's see if they use it.

     they have had that opportunity for four years now. how much longer are you willing to shovel US troops and US treasure down that maw?

     this all so reminiscent of Vietnam, including the brass promising light at the end of the tunnel in congress. it will end the same way.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 12:07pm

108. Jr, you never cease to amaze me. In a good way. --

     =----- is this thread dead yet?

     Had to work in Ann Arbor this morning. Suprised the town was even open, what with the passing of St. Bo. I was pretty sure OSU was going to trounce a once again over rated UM team, but I would hate to be an OSU defensive lineman today. I predict an upset.

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/18/2006 @ 12:33pm

109. The out-in-the-Cold War generation has not only suffered all of that twilight struggle's self-inflicted wounds but also the chronic ones of its grandparent, parent and now, contemporarily insane neocon losers in Korea, the 'Nam, and now the Middle East. WE WANT ALL THIS MADNESS STOPPED NOW, NEVER TO REPRISE. HAD ENOUGH!

     Posted by Vic Anderson at 11/18/2006 @ 12:43pm

110. TOMBETZ 1:48am

     Paying Iraqi companies in the first place to rebuild Iraq would have saved the US tax payer 90% of the costs and been far more efficient. The "story" is that Iraqi firms were shut out of the process because they were state-owned.

     And of course American civilian contractors have stolen an incredible amount of Iraqi assets and the Iraqis can't get them back because contractors are immune (CPA decree) from all Iraqi jurisdiction.

     Posted by felicity at 11/18/2006 @ 1:07pm

111. FROMREDBIRD,

     At the same time understand that the chaos and the civil war in Iraq will continue even as American troops leave. We therefore must be willing to accept the consequences of whoever wins, radical Shiites allied with Iran, etc. But I think that at this point, the Iraqis have to decide for themselves what their fate will be..................

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 1:08pm

112. CRABWALK,

     Ohio State will prevail dear.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 1:08pm

113. thanks Crab, that means a lot to me.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 1:15pm

114. Saddam ruled with a very heavy lid on a boiling pot. Saddam out and the pot boils over - not rocket science. From 1921-1958 Iraq had 50 governments. From 1938 on most of them were the result of military coups. To imagine that the chaos that now defines Iraq would not happen is to believe in the tooth fairy.

     If Iraqis wanted the continued occupation of their country by ANYBODY and that includes Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Quaeda, Americans, Brits, Poles, Indonesians...they would be a people unique in history - the list is very long and very ancient of countries occupied by an alien country fighting to get that country out. Staying in Iraq has no argument to support it.

     Posted by felicity at 11/18/2006 @ 1:17pm

115. I can't help but to shake my head in disgust and sadness that the only thing the bloggers on this and other radical sites can only think of is "us" pulling out of "our" mess. When the world has so many civil wars going on all over the place.

     Why is the Iraq war so much more imporatant then the civil war going on in the Sudan, and it spilling over into neighboring Chad?

     Why didn't Rhowanda raise a concern in the 1990s? Or Ethiopia and Eritrea?

     What about Nepal and Burma? Nigierian Christians and Muslims are killing each other, no concern for that, huh!??

     But, I know many of you will defend yourselves and say those conflicts and its people must decide their own fates. Just so long as we're not it, why should we care?

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 1:36pm

116. Posted by POSEIDON 11/18/2006 @ 1:08pm

     Think pres. Clinton will be visiting Iraq at the end of her 2nd term to sign trade agreements with the 26 Arab League of States?

     XXXXXXXXXXXXX

     Posted by MASK 11/18/2006 @ 07:25am

     A re-post of the previously posted on-line one per the number posted increase changed the %.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 1:39pm

117. acook, what are you suggesting? that the US be the world's policeman?

     Iraq is #1 concern for obvious reasons. feel free to share your other concerns.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 1:45pm

118. Why is the Iraq war so much more imporatant then the civil war going on in the Sudan, and it spilling over into neighboring Chad?

     OIL?

     you do have a point

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 1:48pm

119. Posted by ACOOK 11/18/2006 @ 1:36pm

     WAR_______________NUMBER SERVING__WOUNDED__BATTLE DEATHS

     Revolutionary War_______217,000_________6,188_______4,435

     War of 1812_____________286,730_________4,505_______2,260

     Mexican War______________78,718_________4,152_______1,733

     Civil War (Both Sides)___3,213,363_______354,805____191,963

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 1:58pm

120. Perhaps the Iraqi death count would've been lower if we weren't there helping with the eficacy for torture, death squads and bigger/better/efficient weaponry X multi-targets. The old putting out the fire with gasoline trick. But it's a little late to bring 655,000 Iraqis back to life or was that the hsuB's (faith based/anti-science + born again), 2nd coming solution-- Lazarus biggy sized?

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 2:13pm

121. "you do have a point."

     Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/18/2006 @ 1:48pm

     I'm not suggesting we police the world, only that we show just as much concern for others as we have for ourselves. The media machine made sure "our" war was plastered on the front of every newspaper available. Anything else comes in a distant second. If it doesn't affect us directly, then it's someone else's problem. Europe is the same way.

     HSUBFOOLS, can you also give numbers on Cambodia, Laos, Angola, South Africa, Bosnia, Serbia, Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan, and host of other nations you forgot to mention?

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 2:17pm

122. The media machine made sure "our" war was plastered on the front of every newspaper available.

     this has only been the case recently.

     we are preoccupied, pun intended. I'm not sure what remedy you suggest. we need to put the biggest fire out first.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 2:22pm

123. Then that would be Darfur.

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 2:24pm

124. Posted by ACOOK 11/18/2006 @ 2:17pm

     Which ones are you talking about? Ours/USA?:(Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/18/2006 @ 1:58pm)

     The point was that nations have un-civil wars-- we had ours. But we didn't have a war of independance and a civil war going on at the same time. Plus where the occupying force is a highly advanced war profiteering machine out to steal all of your main resource and wants the chaos in order to do so.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 2:32pm

125. The solution is their political solution, Iraqi, without us being there throwing gasoline on witnesses to our multinationals stealing. Get our military out and the multinationals will fold, the fog will clear and the Iraqis will be able to negotiate together to resolve their disputes. We're mucking it up for them. We're not there for them.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 2:39pm

126. HSUBFOOLS, again, why should "our" war (for what ever reason) take front and center?

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 2:43pm

127. acook, I suspect a hidden agenda.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 2:46pm

128. Cut and run away from our responsibility.

     Posted by JOHN MAASCH 11/17/2006 @ 12:11am | ignore this person

     Troop withdrawals, even phased withdrawal is FACING UP to our responsibility. We made this mess in Iraq, it's time for us to take the steps necessary to clean it up. That means doing those things that are within our power to do. Since the majority of Iraqis see our contiuing presence as a contributing factor in the violence and the majority of Americans want us out, it is foolish to continue a war looking for "victory" while hoping for a miracle that will bring a "win", and is the kind of naive thinking that went into the planning and prosecution of this war. It is the kind of thinking that is unbecoming a president of the United States.

     Posted by yen4truth at 11/18/2006 @ 2:48pm

129. yen, good answer

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 2:50pm

130. JR, what hidden agenda? Is it too much to ask why we think ourselves so much more important then others? If we can question every aspect of the wars this country has fought in and for, why can't we question every aspect of why this nation doesn't feel as passionate about other wars we are not involved in?

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 2:55pm

131. Folks, I'm gonna do a FrankGrits move and "gotta run." But, I'll be back after watching the Heathens vs. the Paegans. Should be a killer game.

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 3:16pm

132. cook, you've made that point. now what?

     I have a 16 year old son, I am very nervous about a possible draft. none of the other tragic wars in the world present that kind of threat to me and my loved one.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/18/2006 @ 3:17pm

133. I think it will be useful to look at The Iraq Study Groups conclusions. They may provide an opportunity for a non-partisan agreement on Iraq. We do need to forget this "Axis of Evil" nonsense. Along with the Sunni states, Syria and Iran need to be part of the solution for Iraq. Syria was our ally during the 1st Gulf War. Baker did a good job in getting the diplomatic ducks in order for that conflict. Perhaps he can do the same job with a peace conference.

     Posted by P. J. Casey at 11/18/2006 @ 3:42pm

134. Go Heathens. Those Pagan jerks need to be knocked off their pedestal.

     Posted by urmygyro at 11/18/2006 @ 3:44pm

135. I have a 16 year old son, I am very nervous about a possible draft. none of the other tragic wars in the world present that kind of threat to me and my loved one.

     Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/18/2006 @ 3:17pm

     Don't lose any sleep. A draft ain't goin' down in this country.

     Posted by urmygyro at 11/18/2006 @ 3:45pm

136. PJ - the axis is forgotten

     Posted by urmygyro at 11/18/2006 @ 3:49pm

137. HSUBFOOLS, again, why should "our" war (for what ever reason) take front and center?

     Posted by ACOOK 11/18/2006 @ 2:43pm

     Er, because it directly affects us and ours. But it's only so per the hsuB admin creating it thusly and for no other reason. All the death, destruction and costs should rest squarely on the hsuB admin even it takes them several decades of indentured servitude-- they should be legally liable along with their corporate war profiteering buds. If Afghanistan had been it and now totally secure-- perhaps we as a nation would have the wherewithal to focus on other wars and lead the UN toward moral involvement. As it is the hsuB admin has withered our great nation's capabilities for greed via their masturbatory 2nd coming fantasy cover story.... but it's the greed and their lack of anything related to moral fiber; thus pigs.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 4:20pm

138. Like I said-- a pig:

     Unlike Clinton, Bush Sees Hanoi in Bit of a Hurry

     By DAVID E. SANGER and HELENE COOPER

     Published: November 19, 2006

     HANOI, Vietnam, Nov. 18 -- President Bush likes speed golf and speed tourism -- this is the man who did the treasures of Red Square in less than 20 minutes -- but here in the lake-studded capital of a nation desperately eager to connect with America, he set a new record.

     Mr. Bush emerged from his hotel for only one nonofficial event, a 15-minute visit to the Joint P.O.W./M.I.A. Accounting Command, which searches for the remains of the 1,800 Americans still listed as missing in the Vietnam War.

     There were almost no Vietnamese present, just a series of tables displaying photographs of the group's painstaking work, and helmets, shoes and replicas of bones recovered by the 425 members of the command. He asked a few questions and then sped off in his motorcade.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 6:01pm

139. JOHANNESROLF,

     Perhaps this was meant for someone else. I am not in favor of continuing the Iraq war. I am in favor of withdrawal. It is time for the Iraqis to decide their own fate.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 8:36pm

140. ACOOK,

     The time has come for other nations of the world to decide their own fates. Either they cut deals to live in peace and stop fighting these insane religious wars, or they deserve to have their societies destroyed. That goes for Bosnia, Rawanda, Congo, Sudan, Darfur, etc. The United Nations will never work as an entity to achieve world peace because it does not have its own standing army and nuclear arsenal. If it had, it could impose order in those lawless lands that you now believe America should police. But since it does not, it will continue to be a pawn of the United States, Britain, France, Russia, and China. Face the stark reality, the world does not want peace and it is not our job to sacrifice our children and grandchildren to try and police it. If man does not want peace, he deserves destruction.............

     I'm not suggesting we police the world, only that we show just as much concern for others as we have for ourselves. The media machine made sure "our" war was plastered on the front of every newspaper available. Anything else comes in a distant second. If it doesn't affect us directly, then it's someone else's problem. Europe is the same way.

     HSUBFOOLS, can you also give numbers on Cambodia, Laos, Angola, South Africa, Bosnia, Serbia, Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan, and host of other nations you forgot to mention?

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 8:40pm

141. ACOOK,

     Please, you sound like Katrina Vanden Huevel and Joan Walsh from Salon.Com. Stop being a bleeding heart for the rest of the world. Christianity and Islam have no origins in Africa yet that is what the civil wars in Africa are all about, two stupid religions that have no origins there. If these people are that savage, primitive, and barbaric to kill each other for something none of them invented, they deserve their fates. Just as Americans should have opposed the Iraq war from the getgo. But we are such a warlike society we didn't oppose it, we cheerleaded it, just like the neocon fools that led us to it. It's about personal responsibility and right now, the world, including America, is not showing any..................

     ------------------------------------------------------------------

     JR, what hidden agenda? Is it too much to ask why we think ourselves so much more important then others? If we can question every aspect of the wars this country has fought in and for, why can't we question every aspect of why this nation doesn't feel as passionate about other wars we are not involved in?

     HSUBFOOLS, again, why should "our" war (for what ever reason) take front and center?

     Posted by ACOOK

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 8:47pm

142. RIO BRAVO,

     You must be Drinking from the same punch-bowl as Don "fight 26 million with 130 thousand" "take a knife to a gunfight" Rumsfeld. There is nothing in the Middle East that concerns us nor should we be there with our self appointed title of Lord, Master, and Ruler of the Earth. If you are so hell-bent on staying in a never ending state of war then pack a bag, grab your M-16 and get airlifted to Al Anbar Province. When the United States develops the brainpower that hectoring people invites reprisal attacks, the sooner we can shed or imperial foreign policy that only invites blowback and Sept 11 style attacks.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/18/2006 @ 8:53pm

143. ".....Face the stark reality, the world does not want peace and it is not our job to sacrifice our children and grandchildren to try and police it. If man does not want peace, he deserves destruction............."

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/18/2006 @ 8:40pm

     Well seaman, at least you've been honest in your assessment. I'm just trying to picuture what this world would look like without any sacrifices.

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 8:57pm

144. Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/18/2006 @ 6:01pm

     Fools,

     These conferences aren't really about meeting the indigenous. W's specialty is charming his counterparts tete-a- tete. For example he met with the Aussie PM for two hours, discussing things like Iraq, terrorism in SE Asia, a new "Kyoto" (which would bring in the US, China and India) and India as a nuclear energy producer. (Aus. has 1/3 of the world's easily extractable uranium and is being courted by India and China for that commodity).

     To keep you isolationists up to speed, here is a list of members at the conference: The list is from Nhan Dan aka "Central organ the Communist Party of Vietnam The Voice of the Party, State and People of Vietnam" (which should warm the hearts of all you pinkos).

     21 LEADERS OF APEC MEMBER ECONOMIES

     All delegations of 21 APEC member economies have arrived in Hanoi to attend the 14th APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting (AELM -14) scheduled on November 18 and 19. Following is the list of heads of the delegations:

     1. Head of Australia's delegation: Prime Minister John Howard

     2. Head of Brunei Darussalam's delegation: Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah

     3. Head of Canada's delegation: Prime Minister Stephen Harper 4. Head of Chile's delegation: President Michelle Bachelet

     5. Head of China's delegation: President Hu Jintao

     6. Head of Hong Kong (China)'s delegation: Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Donald Tsang Yam Kuen

     7. Head of Indonesia's delegation: President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono

     8. Head of Japan's delegation: Prime Minister Shinzo Abe

     9. Head of the Republic of Korea (RoK)'s delegation: President Roh Moh-hyun

     10. Head of Malaysia's delegation: Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi

     11. Head of Mexico's delegation: Minister of Economy Sergio Alejandro Garcia de Alba Zepeda

     12. Head of New Zealand's delegation: Prime Minister Helen Clark

     13. Head of Papua New Guinea's delegation: Prime Minister Michael Thomas Somare

     14. Head of Peru's delegation: First Vice President Luis Giampietri

     15. Head of the Philippines' delegation: President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo

     16. Head of Russia's delegation: President Vladimir Putin

     17. Head of Singapore's delegation: Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong

     18. Head of Chinese Taipei's delegation: Chairman of Taiwan Superconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) Morris Chang

     19. Head of Thailand's delegation: Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont

     20. Head of the US delegation: President George W. Bush

     21. Head of Vietnam's delegation: President Nguyen Minh Triet, Chairman of APEC 2006.

     Here's a bit more info for you if you have any room left in your Bush affected and obsessed brain. (If you blokes stopped being little sponges and stopped filling your heads with all the nonsense, that feeds your own ill founded prejudices, you might be able to perform some useful function in society).

     You will find the articles below at: http://www.nhandan.com.vn/english/index.htm

     1.Boosting Vietnam-US co-operative relations.

     2.Fostering the fine Vietnam-Chile relationship.

     Here is a mouthwatering excerpt for those bogged down in the quagmire of their distorted image of the world:

     "The Vietnam visit by former US President Bill Clinton in 2000 and, particularly, the US visit by former Vietnamese Prime Minister Phan Van Khai in 2005 opened a framework for constructive and friendly partnership relations; and stable and lasting multi-faceted co-operation between the two countries. High-level officials of the two countries have met and exchanged ideas at many multilateral forums.

     The economic and trade relations have made quick progress since Vietnam – US trade agreement took effect in December 2001. The two-way trade turnover in 2005 reached US $7.8 billion, an increase of 20% against 2004 and 17 times more than that of 1995, and is expected to reach US $10 billion this year. The United States is the ninth largest investor in Vietnam with over US $2 billion effective foreign direct investment that is still valid. There are now more than 1,000 American businesses operating in Vietnam.

     In 2006, many groups and companies from the United States have been to Vietnam to seek investment and business opportunities, particularly the US-ASEAN Business Council delegation with 21 leading businesses of the United States, and Microsoft president Bill Gates.

     The two countries have signed many co-operation agreements such as: agreement on science and technology co-operation, garment and textile agreement, aviation agreement, framework agreement on economic and technical co-operation, a deal on co-operation in drug prevention and agreement on co-operation in health and medical science. Co-operation in fields of science, technology, culture, education and training, health and labour; human issues left by the war, and co-operation in security, military and anti-terrorism are making progress.

     Negotiations and meetings between President Bush and Vietnamese senior officials during the visit are very important and helpful, helping boost multi-faceted co-operative relations between Vietnam and the United States.

     We wish President George W. Bush's visit great success, contributing to consolidating and developing the Vietnam-US relations in the interest of the people of each country, for the sake of peace, stability and development in the region and in the world." NHAN DAN

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/18/2006 @ 8:59pm

145. Seaman, just because you're a god-designate, doesn't mean you shouldn't care. What would your loyal sea subjects think of you?!!

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 9:05pm

146. It does not take a political and military genius to know both Afganistan and Iraq are essential to stablizing the M.E. and one could include a change of power in Iran with or without the U.S. intervening militarily. Preferably it would be without! States subsidizing and proliferating Islamic terrorism have been put on notice.

     Posted by RIO BRAVO 11/18/2006 @ 8:35pm

     But Abizaid is what's left of the many other retiring generals that wanted to do it a better and more effective way that had to quit to say are saying that Rumy screwed it all the hell up and that we should redeploy and work on investing the border country's with securing them. It's a political solution not a military one unless you mean to wipe out 1/3 of the population. Stop our troops from being the catalyst and targets, turn down what's fueling it and stop listiening to the hsuB admin's BS. The hsuB admin is a corporate stooge and can give a rats ass about our troops or our nation for anything other than their own profits.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 9:40pm

147. Fools,

     These conferences aren't really about meeting the indigenous.

     Posted by LRJONES4 11/18/2006 @ 8:59bm

     LR(kissing hsuB's downunder good)JonesIIII,

     I did not know the "the Joint P.O.W./M.I.A. Accounting Command, which searches for the remains of the 1,800 Americans still listed as missing in the Vietnam War" were considered indigenous. But then why would you care unless you may be making a profit! Must be getting paid good to sink that low.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 9:47pm

148. HSUBFOOLS, again, why should "our" war (for what ever reason) take front and center?

     Posted by ACOOK

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/18/2006 @ 8:47pm

     Are you asking me his question? I believe I answered it already but if you want to clarify what aspect of what I said was vague or to counter, please elaborate.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 9:52pm

149. ACOOK has a point. Darfur should have been cause for the US military, not Iraq. chimp should have spent his capital there.

     He coulda been a contendah for great, if he had done Afghanistan right, and led the world in shutting down the genocide in Darfur. Years ago.

     But he didn't. And he a Chump.

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/18/2006 @ 10:20pm

150. HSUBFOOLS, again, why should "our" war (for what ever reason) take front and center?

     Posted by ACOOK

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/18/2006 @ 8:47pm

     "Are you asking me his question? I believe I answered it already but if you want to clarify what aspect of what I said was vague or to counter, please elaborate."

     Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/18/2006 @ 9:52pm |

     You answered my question already. Besides, Seagod thinks I'm a bleeding heart anyway.

     Posted by ACook at 11/18/2006 @ 10:39pm

151. He coulda been a contendah for great, if he had done Afghanistan right, and led the world in shutting down the genocide in Darfur. Years ago.

     But he didn't. And he a Chump.

     Posted by CRABWALK 11/18/2006 @ 10:20pm

     Is it not more than too obvious-- the hsuB never had it in him in the first place. His destiny was is to be the worst US pres in history.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 11:00pm

152. You answered my question already. Besides, Seagod thinks I'm a bleeding heart anyway.

     Posted by ACOOK 11/18/2006 @ 10:39pm

     I think you're sane with a soul living in an insane and mostly soulless world. My hope, what's left of it, is that the dems at least steer our nation in a rational direction. They may not be able to fix all the shit hsuB did, but they'll get a lot of support and more dems in 2008 if they continually attempt to undo the evil, pull it into the light, investigate, do oversight and let the people see what corrosive idiotic twisted damage hsuB wrought to our nation.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/18/2006 @ 11:18pm

153. Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/18/2006 @ 9:47pm

     Fools,

     If I had any idea what you are trying to say in the 9.47pm post I would pay you the courtesy of a response. If you wish to decode it for me I will respond.

     From a non-partisan vantage point I'm surprised by the generosity of spirit toward Bush, as well as some qualified support for his Iraq venture, by present and some incoming Democratic Party members of the House and Senate.

     As one, influenced by these threads, I fully expected all of them to be crazy Bush-haters like you. Looks like you blokes are still not represented in the "halls of power". Better luck next time.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/18/2006 @ 11:27pm

154. If I had any idea what you are trying to say in the 9.47pm post I would pay you the courtesy of a response.

     Posted by LRJONES4 11/18/2006 @ 11:27bm

     Feigning ignorance has gotten hsuB just so far too. You only concede your very weak obfuscation's lack of persuasion. Good luck with that strategy. It makes you a hsuB stooge wannabe or a paid real one.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 12:17am

155. But he didn't. And he a Chump.

     Posted by CRABWALK 11/18/2006 @ 10:20pm

     C,

     Would that make him a Chumpy Chimp or a Chimpy Chump? Some of us, getting fewer, still think he is a Champ.

     Suggest there is a chance that what's happening in Africa is linked to what is happening in Iraq and the US would still have had the same post war scenario that is occuring in Iraq. The "Holy Warrior" flow would have been reversed and Darfur would have been the destination for the jihadists.

     Even before Sudan's 1956 independence from Great Britain, the new government in Khartoum had begun a program of Arabization and Islamisation of the whole country. The Muslims, Arab and Blacks make up about 70% and Christians about 15% of the population, so though there is no Sunni,Shia rivalry the Arabs are in conflict with the Blacks (Muslims included) and are repressing them. Had the US intervened it would have not only been seen as anti-Muslim and pro-Christian but also as anti-Arab. If you think Iraq is a lost cause and a quagmire a similar nation building exercise in Sudan would have made the present Iraq look like a fun park.

     Though it seems fair to leave the floundering and partisan Maliki sort out his own countrymen (I have some sympathy for that view) one needs to remember that Iraq was left bereft of any institutions of democracy after 30 years of autocratic rule by the Baathists.

     I guess we judged Iraq by the highly educated elite that had sought refuge in our countries and whom we knew personally or knew of through the media. You will know that the "medievalists" are in the process of killing or hounding the remaining intellectual class out of Iraq. Its from that class that moderate leaders and those imbued with the spirit of modernity would come. These barbarians are not fools and know what they are doing. In that context what chance,in the shorter term, does Iraq have of a decent future.

     Maybe, just maybe, the new Congress will give some weight to that reality as they consider what the US should do wrt to Iraq.

     One could say as Iraq goes so goes Dafur.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 12:40am

156. Suggest there is a chance that what's happening in Africa is linked to what is happening in Iraq and the US would still have had the same post war scenario that is occuring in Iraq.

     These barbarians are not fools and know what they are doing. In that context what chance,in the shorter term, does Iraq have of a decent future.

     One could say as Iraq goes so goes Dafur.

     Posted by LRJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 12:40bm

     Er, no. "Iraq is a disaster", Blair. DowneySt Memo, Lied us to war, No strategy to keep the peace, no exit strategy, corporate profiteering highest ever, oil profits highest ever, Iraq is a war of choice-- hsuB's choice. Darfur is completely different situation and there's no corporate money making insentive-- strickly humanitarian in nature and one in which would require a soul of the hsuB admin. hsuB lacking one, chose to go to Iraq per the hsuB admin greed. Darfur = no greed so let die. Iraq = greed so let kill... Oh, so there's the connection.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 01:13am

157. Er, no. "Iraq is a disaster", Blair. DowneySt Memo, Lied us to war, No strategy to keep the peace, no exit strategy, corporate profiteering highest ever, oil profits highest ever, Iraq is a war of choice-- hsuB's choice. Darfur is completely different situation and there's no corporate money making insentive-- strickly humanitarian in nature and one in which would require a soul of the hsuB admin. hsuB lacking one, chose to go to Iraq per the hsuB admin greed. Darfur = no greed so let die. Iraq = greed so let kill... Oh, so there's the connection. Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/19/2006 @ 01:13am

     Fools,

     I've shown before that until Phase 2 of the Senate Report (On how the Admin used the pre-war Intelligence) The "Liars" are those who claim "Bush lied us into the war".

     Obviously you have you have read the first part of the Senate report into the pre-war intelligence or Bush's address to the UN prior to the 2003 war. That is the only data that has any credibility. As far as Blair's admission about "Iraq the disaster" goes, that is a fraudulent use of the interview. Suggest you listen to what he actually said.

     Darfur would not have been a money-spinner?

     Oh fools, fools has your fertile imagination deserted you?

     Notice the date of this Washington Post report (abstract of). As of a few days ago China is merrily pumping (solely humanitarian I take it) oil from Sudan. Think of all the opportunities for your robber barons with all that lovely oil and then the thousands of shoddy houses for the homeless by which Parsons could have ripped off your tax payers.

     Thirty eight million of them (Sudanese) too. That equates to building about 1.5 times the number of Iraqi shoddy schools and hospitals that Bush could have used to line the pockets of his mates. Darfur not a money-spinner? You have no idea of the "greed" that could have been brought into play. Of course such "humanitarian" intervention in China's fiefdom may have precipitated WW3 but at least it would have been in a "good" cause.

     CHINA INVESTS HEAVILY IN SUDAN'S OIL INDUSTRY

     Beijing Supplies Arms Used on Villagers

     By Peter S. Goodman

     Washington Post Foreign Service Thursday, December 23, 2004

     Sudan is China's largest overseas oil project. China is Sudan's largest supplier of arms, according to a former Sudan government minister. Chinese-made tanks, fighter planes, bombers, helicopters, machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades have intensified Sudan's two-decade-old north-south civil war. A cease-fire is in effect and a peace agreement is expected to be signed by year-end. But the fighting in Sudan's Darfur region rages on, as government-backed Arab militias push African tribes off their land.

     In the case of Sudan, Africa's largest country, China is in a lucrative partnership that delivers billions of dollars in investment, oil revenue and weapons -- as well as diplomatic protection -- to a government accused by the United States of genocide in Darfur and cited by human rights groups for systematically massacring civilians and chasing them off ancestral lands to clear oil-producing areas. The country once gave safe haven to Osama bin Laden and is listed by Washington as a state supporter of terrorism. U.S. companies are prohibited from investing there.

     Part of a broader push by China to expand trade and influence across the African continent, its relationship with Sudan also demonstrates the intensity of China's quest for energy security and its willingness to do business wherever it must to lock up oil.

     The pressure to find new sources of oil has grown as China has swelled into the world's second-largest consumer and as production at the largest of its domestic fields is declining. According to government statistics, China's imports have grown from about 6 percent of its oil needs a decade ago to roughly one-third today and are forecast to rise to rise to 60 percent by 2020.

     "China confronts foreign competition," said Chen Fengying, an expert at the China Contemporary International Relations Institute, which is based in Beijing and affiliated with the state security system. "Chinese companies must go places for oil where American [and] European companies are not present. Sudan represents this strategy put into practice."

     China National Petroleum Corp. owns 40 percent -- the largest single share -- of the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Co., a consortium that dominates Sudan's oil fields in partnership with the national energy company and firms from Malaysia and India.

     From its seat on the United Nations Security Council, China has been Sudan's chief diplomatic ally. In recent months, the council has neared votes on a series of resolutions aimed at pressuring Sudan's predominantly Arab government to protect the African tribes under attack in Darfur and stop support for militias by threatening to sanction its oil sales. China has threatened to veto such actions while watering down the threat of oil sanctions.

     "China has a long tradition of friendly relations with Sudan," Wang Guangya, China's ambassador to the U.N., said in a recent interview in New York. He confirmed China's veto threats, though he dismissed as "categorically wrong" suggestions that oil interests were a factor, asserting that the resolutions would have eliminated the Sudan government's incentive to cooperate. China -- itself often criticized on human rights issues -- has a philosophical predisposition against outside pressure.

     But Chinese diplomatic experts say oil interests clearly played a role in Beijing's actions at the United Nations.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 04:11am

158. ACOOK,

     Hopefully, by the time the rapture and planetary armageddon happens, I will be long gone and will miss the religious festivities. America has sacrificed for the rich elites and the foolish societies of the Earth long enough. It's time that people come to grips with the reality. They can build peaceful prosperous societies or they can destroy themselves through a never ending state of war, death, and destruction. IT'S TIME THAT EVERYONE ON THIS PLANET, INCLUDING AMERICANS, MAKE THE CHOICE. Where do you stand, ACOOK?

     ----------------------------------------------------------------- Well seaman, at least you've been honest in your assessment. I'm just trying to picuture what this world would look like without any sacrifices.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 07:53am

159. RIO BRAVO,

     One thing about the French and the Swiss, they are not getting their best and brightest citizens slaughtered in Iraq, they are not running up endless debt through Chinese banks, and they don't have to live in a never ending state of fear and cowardice as you do. You see, unlike you and the rest of the chickenhawk faction, the Swiss and the French don't have neocon fools throwing crap all over them and then trying to sell them relief from the gathering horde of flies.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 07:59am

160. ACOOK,

     YOU'RE MAKING ME CRY!!

     Check your history. The Gods never cared much for the fate of humanity. That is as it should be. Man has to decide what he chooses his destiny to be. Wanna be like Rio Bravo, false bravado, lack of spine, or possess the mental and moral strength to know when war is necessary as the last resort? Martin Luther King Jr. knew full well that a never ending state of war bankrupts a society. That is why it is clear that Rio Bravo and others can't be too educated because history clearly shows that empires hellbent on engaing in a never ending state of war don't last forever or for very long.

     As for my loyal sea subjects, they understand that the key to long lasting kingdom is wise and strong leadership!!

     That is what the world needs and is sorely lacking............

     -----------------------------------------------------------------

     ------------------------------------------------------------------- Seaman, just because you're a god-designate, doesn't mean you shouldn't care. What would your loyal sea subjects think of you?!!

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 08:09am

161. RIO BRAVO,

     Name the countries that did not engage in the misguided, illogical, and uncessary war on Iraq that have suffered Sept 11 style attacks? I wonder why the raging Islamic Fascism threat that is supposedly going to take over the entire Earth has not surfaced in Norway, China, Japan, Sweden, Brazil, Chile, Greenland, and countless other countries? Could it be that they are not attacking Arab and Muslim nations without cause? I know that you are part of the faith over facts crowd, but Gee, ya might try thinking about that sometime.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 08:15am

162. corn needs to stop hanging out with TNR people. when the guy called with the question about immigration, the neo lib could barely contain his contempt. he literally looked down his nose at the camera. liberals just have NO CLUE when it comes to this issue. the best they can do is mumble something about "enforcing existing laws" meanwhile, it's most certainly one of the biggest issues in the country. thank god jim webb is coming to end the east coast democratic establishment forever. put the liberals in their coffin, long live the democratic party!

     Posted by lester1/2jr at 11/19/2006 @ 09:59am

163. poseidon, my mistake, sorry.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/19/2006 @ 10:23am

164. LRJONES.

     He a chump!

     I've been through this at least 3 times here, supplying a laundry list of lies. Sorry you missed it. . chimp is a LIAR. No ifs and or buts about it. He and birdshot picked intel they liked, ignored the rest and told us unequivocally that Iraq was a threat to us. They lied. If phase II backed them up, we would have it in our laps by now.

     "The Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

     "[Iraq] has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of Al Qaeda."

     "As our coalition takes their power, we will deliver the food and medicine you need."

     "[T]he only way to reduce the harm and duration of war is to apply the full force and might of our military, and we are prepared to do so."

     "The terrorist threat to America and the world will be diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed."

     And those are all from one speech!!!

     "Saddam would not let the inspectors in."

     "We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."

     "Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.""Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."

     "We have found WMDs in Iraq."

     "I fulfilled my duty."

     "I'm a uniter not a divider"

     "I'm spending less than Bill Clinton."

     "No one could have imagined them hijacking airplanes."

     Air Force One was a target.

     British airways saw him flying his plastic turkey to Iraq, nearly forcing them to turn around.

     Bill Clinton pillaged the White House as he walked out the door.

     "I was never arrested after 1972"

     "I supported the Patient Protection Act."

     I want to get to the bottom of the Plame leak.

     "Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way.

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/19/2006 @ 10:31am

165. Are his pants on fire?

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/19/2006 @ 10:33am

166. These barbarians are not fools and know what they are doing.-LRJONES

     Unlike Chimp the Chump.

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/19/2006 @ 10:35am

167. "Clear Skies legislation, when passed by Congress, will significantly reduce smog and mercury emissions, as well as stop acid rain. It will put more money directly into programs to reduce pollution, so as to meet firm national air-quality goals. ..." --

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/19/2006 @ 10:43am

168. Seagod, in your 8:15am post you forgot to mention the riots in France by the muslim youth, or the death of VanGogh in Denmark by a radical muslim or the treats of violence all over Europe by their growing muslim population. You're kinda right on the Europeans not starting this current war in the ME...but the ME sure is waging war in Europe.

     Damn!!!...half of our troop strength is in Europe. Do we pull out there too!!!

     Posted by ACook at 11/19/2006 @ 11:02am

169. hey, I heard the chimp finally made it to Vietnam.

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 11:07am

170. and were at war

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 11:08am

171. how long before we start hearing that chimpy is a veteren of the Vietnam---war?

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 11:08am

172. Name the countries that did not engage in the misguided, illogical, and uncessary war on Iraq that have suffered Sept 11 style attacks? I wonder why the raging Islamic Fascism threat that is supposedly going to take over the entire Earth has not surfaced in Norway, China, Japan, Sweden, Brazil, Chile, Greenland, and countless other countries? Could it be that they are not attacking Arab and Muslim nations without cause? I know that you are part of the faith over facts crowd, but Gee, ya might try thinking about that sometime.

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/19/2006 @ 08:15am

     P,

     Pretty obvious that you would never be entrusted to set exam papers in any discipline.

     Here's a little exam for you:

     1.Did the US as a member of the Coalition suffer any 9/11 attacks after the Iraq invasion?

     2.Did Australia as the most vocally supportive member of the Coalition have its 88 citizens killed in Bali by the JI (Al Qaeda affiliate) bombers before or after March 2003?

     3.Were the 75 others; Europeans and other nationalities, including 6 German, 5 Swedish, 4 French, 3 Swiss, 3 NZers, 2 Canadians and 2 Brazilians killed in Bali by the same explosion because their countries of origin would not be involved in the Iraq war?

     4.To help you with Q1, Q2 & Q3. Which comes first March 2003, September 11th 2001 or October 12th 2002?

     If you do not know the answers to any of the first three questions have a guess at Q4.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 11:20am

173. how long before we start hearing that chimpy is a veteren of the Vietnam---war?

     Posted by WILL C. 11/19/2006 @ 11:08am

     More to the point Willie will we see a Viet battalion in Iraq in 2007 because the charmer went with a fistful of dollars rather than a gun?

     ps. Pretty sure Iraq's going to be OK since I read this in today's NYT:

     "...Mr. Madfai, the architect, disagreed. A coup would not work. The new government would be besieged. "All those militias will turn to fight against them," he said, speaking by telephone.

     He paused as two helicopters thundered overhead. The beer was running out, he said, a problem he blamed on the Americans. All the alcohol sellers in his area, Mansour, have been killed, and most shops are now closed.

     "Who's responsible for that? Rumsfeld," he said. "He should send us some beer."

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 11:33am

174. Posted by QuagmireJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 11:20am

     before poseiden answers your questions quagmire. Maybe you should answer his

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 11:35am

175. Posted by LRJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 04:11am

     The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is an international organization made up of Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela. Since 1965 its international headquarters have been in Vienna, Austria. It is considered to be a cartel by many observers [1][2].

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC

     Er, Jones IV, don't see Sudan on the list? What I see is:

     Sudan comes third in African after South Africa and Egypt in the volume of industrial activities. The total investments in the industrial sector are estimated at 15 billion US dollars, mostly in agro-industries, including sugar, textile fabrics, vegetable oil industry, tanneries, canning factories, milk factories, in addition to agriculture related industries such as agricultural implements, fertilizers, chemicals, medical and veterinary products, etc.

     http://www.tpsudan.org/industry%20in%20 sudan/industry%20in%20sudan.htm

     And I suppose Japan is in on controlling Sudan for it's minimal oil reserves too...

     Monday 14 August 2006 10:01. Printer-Friendly version Aug 14, 2006 (KUALA LUMPUR) -- Sudan will export its first crude cargo from the 40,000 barrel-per-day (bpd) Thar Jath oilfield, totalling 400,000 barrels from end-August, an industry source said on Monday.

     The source said the new crude was similar in quality to Nile Blend, Sudan's main export grade which has found a ready market in China and Japan.

     Sudan produces around 330,000 bpd of Nile Blend crude, a heavy grade with a low-sulphur content, which can be burnt by power generators in Japan and has a high fuel oil yield.

     The new production from Thar Jath comes as a relief to Sudan, whose second major crude stream, Dar Blend, has been delayed by a year due to technical problems. The Dar Blend field could produce up to 200,000 bpd once fully on stream.

     http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article17079

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 11:39am

176. Posted by LRJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 11:33am

     More to the point Willie will we see a Viet battalion in Iraq in 2007 because the charmer went with a fistful of dollars rather than a gun?

     (chuckle) no

     ps. Pretty sure Iraq's going to be OK since I read this in today's NYT:

     "...Mr. Madfai, the architect, disagreed. A coup would not work. The new government would be besieged. "All those militias will turn to fight against them," he said, speaking by telephone.

     what does that have to do with the Vietnam--war

     He paused as two helicopters thundered overhead. The beer was running out, he said, a problem he blamed on the Americans. All the alcohol sellers in his area, Mansour, have been killed, and most shops are now closed.

     apparently the guy in Al mansiour hasn't seen all the progress the chimpy sees either

     "Who's responsible for that? Rumsfeld," he said. "He should send us some beer."

     well quamire, since rumdud can't raid that tax cofferes anymore for the beer, it sounds like you have a new business opportunity sitting there for you to grab at. Tell us how it works out for you

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 11:43am

177. Posted by CRABWALK 11/19/2006 @ 10:31am

     I believe chronic/habitual lying goes for the entire hsuB admin. The list would go on for pages and years. But paid stooges like Jones IV are in on it so everything they write here should be held suspect and done souly to sprend lies on top off the old ones in order to create such a thick scab, it would be virtualy impossible to remove. Everyone needs to make sure none of them stick and are called out.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 11:46am

178. er, solely

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 12:02pm

179. before poseiden answers your questions quagmire. Maybe you should answer his

     Posted by WILL C. 11/19/2006 @ 11:35am

     Willie would you please tell him about Japan and would he be happy to swap Iceland for Greenland and Columbia, Nicaragua and Panama for Chile. How about Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia and Hungary for Norway. While you're at it could you give him a rundown on all those naughty Norwegian piccies that got an embassy or two vandalised?

     Bugger Willie can't do a swap with Norway because they are part of the coalition of the willing. No wonder they were doing all those pictures of you know whom.

     Willie would you be able to hold some classes for the ignoramuses on your side of the fence who know nuttin and couldn't think straight if their lives depended on it. Fools is a prime candidate for "re-education". If you know what I mean.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 12:27pm

180. Did ya hear FrankGrits is taking a year off from the Nation? Man!! Who's gonna rant with us now!??....Who's gonna tell it like he thinks he sees it??? (No Plunger and Reese, you can not take his place!!!...:)

     What's the blog coming to these days!!!

     Posted by ACook at 11/19/2006 @ 12:31pm

181. He paused as two helicopters thundered overhead. The beer was running out, he said, a problem he blamed on the Americans. All the alcohol sellers in his area, Mansour, have been killed, and most shops are now closed.

     apparently the guy in Al mansiour hasn't seen all the progress the chimpy sees either

     "Who's responsible for that? Rumsfeld," he said. "He should send us some beer."

     well quamire, since rumdud can't raid that tax cofferes anymore for the beer, it sounds like you have a new business opportunity sitting there for you to grab at. Tell us how it works out for you

     Posted by WILL C. 11/19/2006 @ 11:43am

     Don't be so thickheaded young Willie. I'll bet getting more Iraqis onto the grog will be part of the Dems New Direction in Iraq. It's not business I had in mind but the corruption of a nation.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 12:36pm

182. Willie would you be able to hold some classes for the ignoramuses on your side of the fence who know nuttin and couldn't think straight if their lives depended on it. Fools is a prime candidate for "re-education". If you know what I mean.

     Posted by LRJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 12:27am

     I know that you still haven't answered poseidens questions.

     and they weren't even difficult questions to answer

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 1:01pm

183. Don't be so thickheaded young Willie. I'll bet getting more Iraqis onto the grog will be part of the Dems New Direction in Iraq. It's not business I had in mind but the corruption of a nation.

     Posted by QuagmireJONES4t 11/19/2006 @ 12:36am

     So you think the democrats want to gt the iraqi's all sauced up on booze like a chimp (or an aussie)

     Not that I'd ever collect but how much did you want to bet on that?

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 1:05pm

184. Posted by CRABWALK 11/19/2006 @ 10:31am

     C,

     I have read the (released) bi-partisan Senate report (P1) on pre-war intelligence. It completely exonerates the Aministration of leaning on the Intelligence community in anyway. There are 117 conclusions.

     All that you mention is partisan opinion that is refuted or at least disputed by partisans on the other side of the debate. At this stage ie. before P2 is released the fullest investigation by your Senate lays the blame squarely on your Intelligence agencies. Have you fully read that report or are your merely the slave of partisan opinions?

     The second partisan charge is that the human rights angle was only thought of by the Administration when no WMDs were found. That claim is made in ignorance of Bush's Speech to the UN (pre-war) which was shot through with calls to remove the Saddam regime because of its human rights abuses. Again have you been interested enough to read that speech or do you only read partisan opinions that confirm your own prejudices?

     I reserve my judgement until the second part of the Senate report viz. on how the administration used the intelligence available to it, is released.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 1:17pm

185. Name the countries that did not engage in the misguided, illogical, and uncessary war on Iraq that have suffered Sept 11 style attacks?

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/19/2006 @ 08:15am | ignore this person

     And one might add, how come Spain and the UK suffered their worst terrorists attack during the time they were 'fighting the enemy in Iraq rather than on their home soil'?

     Posted by vvvenus at 11/19/2006 @ 1:57pm

186. I have read the (released) bi-partisan Senate report (P1) on pre-war intelligence.

     Bi-partisan. Eh. And you read the realeased parts, not the whole thing.

     I was told that without a doubt, no question, Iraq was a threat to me. That was a lie. Plain and simple.

     And you missed a point a ways back, this is what i wrote "and led the world in shutting down the genocide in Darfur. I did not say go in guns a-blazin with no plan. I said "lead the world", as in put together a real coalition, spread the work, cost and thinking.But that is beyond our Chimpy. The Thoughtless President.

     Could the lack of attacks in the US have something to do with the oceans? Or that it is easier to attack US troops in Iraq, while women and children get caught in the crossfire. We brought the war on terror to them, not vice-versa. Islamic terrorism has increased worldwide, but we here in the US have not had to face it. Is that a morally superior position? "Hey Folks, sorry about your dead. We're safe. Happy Days".

     Remember "Bring it on"?

     Bush, and you, have a lot of utopian ideas, but have failed to institute them. Plain and simple.

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/19/2006 @ 2:35pm

187. That first sentence should have had this-Posted by LRJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 1:17pm-

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/19/2006 @ 2:37pm

188. Might be old news to most,

     WPost-

     By Peter Baker Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, November 19, 2006; Page A01

     The weekend after the statue of Saddam Hussein fell, Kenneth Adelman and a couple of other promoters of the Iraq war gathered at Vice President Cheney's residence to celebrate. The invasion had been the "cakewalk" Adelman predicted. Cheney and his guests raised their glasses, toasting President Bush and victory. "It was a euphoric moment," Adelman recalled.

     Forty-three months later, the cakewalk looks more like a death march, and Adelman has broken with the Bush team. He had an angry falling-out with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld this fall. He and Cheney are no longer on speaking terms. And he believes that "the president is ultimately responsible" for what Adelman now calls "the debacle that was Iraq----

     -A certain weary crankiness sets in with any administration after six years. By this point in Bill Clinton's tenure, bitter Democrats were competing to denounce his behavior with an intern even as they were trying to fight off his impeachment. Ronald Reagan was deep in the throes of the Iran-contra scandal. But Bush's strained relations with erstwhile friends and allies take on an extra edge of bitterness amid the dashed hopes of the Iraq venture.( CRAB- a blow job vs a war and drugs for bombs with the Iranians. Quite a contrast. Glad the repubes are looking out for the real issues)

     "There are a lot of lives that are lost," Adelman said in an interview last week. "A country's at stake. A region's at stake. This is a gigantic situation. . . . This didn't have to be managed this bad. It's just awful."---

     "The three individuals who got the highest civilian medals the president can give were responsible for a lot of the debacle that was Iraq," Adelman said. All told, he said, the Bush national security team has proved to be "the most incompetent" of the past half-century. But, he added, "Obviously, the president is ultimately responsible."

     Adelman said he remained silent for so long out of loyalty.

     -------

     those gosh darn librools! Breaking Chimpies balls like this. they ought to be ashamed. But hang in there LR, only 40 more years and you may be proven right.

     Posted by crabwalk at 11/19/2006 @ 3:09pm

189. I have read the (released) bi-partisan Senate report (P1) on pre-war intelligence. It completely exonerates the Aministration of leaning on the Intelligence community in anyway. There are 117 conclusions.

     Posted by QuagmireJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 1:17pm

     Is quagmire still arguing that saddam was a threat to the United States?

     Guess what quagmire. He wasn't. He wasn't during the gulf war. He wasn't after the gulf war. He isn't now.

     quagmire this isn't just sour grapes on your part because the hamsters lost the election is it?

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 3:19pm

190. because how many WMD do we not have to find before you admit saddam didn't have any?

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 3:20pm

191. ACOOK,

     I WOULDN'T COMPARE RIOTING IN THE STREETS TO A SOPHISTICATED TERROR OPERATION DESIGNED TO CREATE DESTRUCTION ON A MASS SCALE

     That is such a weak and flimsy argument. Riots occured in Watts in '67 and Los Angeles after the Rodney King verdict here in America and the KKK has lynched many minorities throughout history. But what you forget is that all these events occured as a retaliatory strike after a wrong or strongly pereceived wrong done to a certain segment of society whether you agree with it or not. Attacks aimed at an entire race of people or society as a whole always are in response to what "the powers that be" have inflicted on the weak and powerless. And the current climate has whites in America and Europe play blame the muslims for all their problems and stupid mistakes. Look in the mirror, people, if westerners stop invading countries that they feel they can slap around simply for sh*ts and giggles, you will find that you can and will largely put an end to terrorism. I truly can not figure out why Americans don't get the message that these people do not wish to be occupied by foreign powers......................

     ------------------------------------------------------------------ Seagod, in your 8:15am post you forgot to mention the riots in France by the muslim youth, or the death of VanGogh in Denmark by a radical muslim or the treats of violence all over Europe by their growing muslim population. You're kinda right on the Europeans not starting this current war in the ME...but the ME sure is waging war in Europe.

     Damn!!!...half of our troop strength is in Europe. Do we pull out there too!!!

     Posted by ACOOK

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 7:03pm

192. LRJONES4,

     Another weak and ridiculous case. You pepole are grasping at straws, like Bush, for his "one last gasp of a push" to take Bagdad. Those attacks took place in another Muslim country, Indonesia. When are you people going to answer questions correctly and honestly?

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 7:07pm

193. WILL C.

     His non-answer is answer enough. These people believe in an imperial foreign policy, which says that western powers can invade whoever (in this case Arab/Muslim nations) whenever they see fit, which of course, invites blowback (9/11 style terror attacks) in the future. They are more than welcome to continue to borrow money from Chinese banks to finance their endless of wars of stupidity while exporting all of their jobs to Mexico, Thailand, and the Philippines. Let them continue their present course until the economy crashes...............Afterall, as that idiot John McCain stated today on This Week the terrorists will follow the U.S. Army home to Fort Dix. I can just see it now, the ditto head talking points from Rio Bravo and QuagmireJONES4 that Al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri will be sitting in the seat next to General Casey on the C-130 Home..................How stupid can Aemricans be?

     ------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted by QuagmireJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 11:20am

     before poseiden answers your questions quagmire. Maybe you should answer his

     Posted by WILL C.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 7:19pm

194. P. J. Casey,

     Forget the Axis of Evil? In the words of Rio Bravo, how dare you raise the white flag of surrender to the terrorists? What on earth are you thinking?

     ------------------------------------------------------------------- I think it will be useful to look at The Iraq Study Groups conclusions. They may provide an opportunity for a non-partisan agreement on Iraq. We do need to forget this "Axis of Evil" nonsense. Along with the Sunni states, Syria and Iran need to be part of the solution for Iraq. Syria was our ally during the 1st Gulf War. Baker did a good job in getting the diplomatic ducks in order for that conflict. Perhaps he can do the same job with a peace conference.

     Posted by P. J. CASEY

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 7:21pm

195. VVVENUS,

     I have no idea what on Earth you gibberish you are blabbering about. My point is that those nations (Britain, Spain, etc.) suffered their attacks after they assisted with the ill-advised and uncessary invasion of Iraq.

     ------------------------------------------------------------------- Name the countries that did not engage in the misguided, illogical, and uncessary war on Iraq that have suffered Sept 11 style attacks?

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/19/2006 @ 08:15am | ignore this person

     And one might add, how come Spain and the UK suffered their worst terrorists attack during the time they were 'fighting the enemy in Iraq rather than on their home soil'?

     Posted by VVVENUS

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/19/2006 @ 7:24pm

196. Afterall, as that idiot John McCain stated today on This Week the terrorists will follow the U.S. Army home to Fort Dix. I can just see it now, the ditto head talking points from Rio Bravo and QuagmireJONES4 that Al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri will be sitting in the seat next to General Casey on the C-130 Home..................How stupid can Aemricans be?

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/19/2006 @ 7:19pm

     ah yes, the hamsterland fantasy: the only thing keeping the terrorists over there is our army deployed... over there.

     but then that's what brought them (the terrorists) over here in the first place.

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 7:27pm

197. only the fool and the conservative thinks the down trodden will not fight back... that they will never rise against the mighty

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 7:31pm

198. True Bush made a mess of Iraq but cant give up now and we must win this fight and work to refrom other Arab nations or the west is doomed. We all want to get along with each other. Muslim nations are pure evil and growing more and more like Pre 1939 Germany more and more every day.

     Posted by likeitornot at 11/19/2006 @ 7:52pm

199. Posted by WILL C. 11/19/2006 @ 7:27pm

     Willie thought I saw JR complaining about the draft and his son. Hope you haven't got any draft age progeny because I just noticed Charlie Rangels is proposing the draft. Silly buggers aren't you. Your last two Presidents were committed draft dodgers and go and get the draft dream team elected.

     If you don't like Canada you can come to Aus. for sunshine,beaches, sport, super chicks, legal brothels, hardly any evangelicals and NO DRAFT.

     Suppose JR has headed back to the other Aus. already?

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/19/2006 @ 9:23pm

200. Hope you haven't got any draft age progeny because I just noticed Charlie Rangels is proposing the draft. Silly buggers aren't you. Your last two Presidents were committed draft dodgers and go and get the draft dream team elected.

     Posted by QuagmireJONES4 11/19/2006 @ 9:23pm

     Oh quagmire, So far away. So clueless. Charlie Rangel has been proposing a draft since before the chimp invaded Iraq.

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 10:16pm

201. "...There seems to be a contradiction between the two sides of this plan: disengage (via troop withdrawals) but make reconstruction and training work. Reid..."

     I am so glad that this respectful liberal newspaper itself noted and published what Sen. Reid is about. This is just a typical crook who just says whatever people want to hear to make him look good. He is one of the reasons why the amnesty bill passed the senate floor.

     I am a conservative who agrees that the GOP really disppointed us all. However, with people like Sen. Reid in power, I don't see how this country will move ahead.

     As far as Iraq goes, I think the first step would be by impeaching Pres. Bush. That could at least minimize the idea that We The People are complacent to Pres. Bush's misactions in Iraq.

     Then perhaps bomb some Iraq neighborhoods hard. At that point simply bring the troops home. That is not our war.

     Posted by MARLON2006 at 11/19/2006 @ 10:23pm

202. There is no such war anymore. What American soldiers are doing there is policing. Sitting there with rifles and taking a shot on your head is not a war.

     If US troops are left there, that will just attract more insurgents to kill them. Now the news everywhere is that Americans are in the run, therefore the enemy is sharp and ready to kick our but.

     The best thing to do now is to impeach Pres. Bush and Cheney. Then get out of there.

     Posted by MARLON2006 at 11/19/2006 @ 10:28pm

203. Seems the US citizens figured it out:

     Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Nov. 9-12, 2006. N=1,479 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults). RV = registered voters

     "Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force against Iraq?"

     Date________Right Decision__Wrong Decision__Unsure

     11/9-12/06_________41___________51__________8

     10/17-22/06________43___________47_________10

     9/21 - 10/4/06______45___________47__________8

     6/14-19/06_________49___________44__________7

     How well is the U.S. military effort in Iraq going . . . ?"

     Date________Very Well__Fairly Well__Not Too Well__Not at All Well__Unsure

     11/9-12/06_________6________26________34_________30_________4

     10/17-22/06________5________30________34_________25_________6

     9/21 - 10/4/06______8________29________33_________25_________5

     6/14-19/06________16________37________25_________18_________4

     "Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?"

     Date________Keep Troops__Bring Home__Unsure

     11/9-12/06_____46__________48__________6

     10/17-22/06____46__________47__________7

     9/21 - 10/4/06__47__________47__________6

     9/6-10/06______47__________47__________6

     6/14-19/06_____50__________45__________5

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 10:41pm

204. Do you think George W. Bush has a clear plan for bringing the situation in Iraq to a successful conclusion, or don't you think so?"

     Date_________Has a Clear Plan__Doesn't Have a Clear Plan__Unsure

     11/9-12/06______________19_____________74_____________7

     3/8-12/06_______________23_____________70_____________7

     12/7-11/05______________28_____________66_____________6

     9/8-11/05_______________30_____________63_____________7

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 10:47pm

205. Little by little, step by step, slowly I turn...

     "Do you think the war in Iraq has helped the war on terrorism, or has it hurt the war on terrorism?"

     Date_________Helped __Hurt__No Effect___Unsure

     11/9-12/06_____37______48______5_______10

     10/17-22/06____36______46______6_______12

     9/21 - 10/4/06__38______47______5_______10

     6/14-19/06_____44______40______6_______10

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 10:53pm

206. Which concerns you more -- that the U.S. will leave Iraq before a stable democracy is in place, OR, that the U.S. will wait too long to withdraw its troops from Iraq?" Options rotated

     Date______Leave Too Soon__Wait Too Long____Neither____Unsure

     11/9-12/06_______33___________55___________3__________9

     3/8-12/06________30___________61___________3__________6

     10/6-10/05_______32___________55___________4__________9

     7/13-17/05_______34___________50___________9__________7

     4/1-4/04_________36___________52___________2_________10

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 11:00pm

207. "Do you think the U.S. should or should not set a timetable for when troops will be withdrawn from Iraq?"

     Date__________Should__Should Not__Should Get Out Now__Unsure

     11/9-12/06______56_________36___________1____________7

     10/17-22/06_____54_________37___________2____________7

     9/21 - 10/4/06___53_________39___________2____________6

     6/14-19/06______52_________42___________2____________4

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 11:08pm

208. "Do you think the U.S. should or should not set a timetable for when troops will be withdrawn from Iraq?"

     Date__________Should__Should Not__Should Get Out Now__Unsure

     11/9-12/06______56_________36___________1____________7

     Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/19/2006 @ 11:08pm

     I certainly hope we have a time table for withdrawing our troops from iraq. Cluster fucking it out of iraq may have a certain appeal to the hamsters (it follows along nicely with the rest of their bone headed plan) but it will surely have the effect of rout in the minds of our service men and women and in that of the world.

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 11:26pm

209. Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/19/2006 @ 11:08pm

     hey bro, what's your source for that poll?

     Posted by Will C. at 11/19/2006 @ 11:27pm

210. At least there's no way to get our US forces up to anywhere near half a million in Iraq without a draft and that isn't going to happen either. This seems to be a chess game where we already know the loser 5-10 moves ahead per the mistaken impression of one of the players-- hsuB is playing checkers, and some still think he's playing with a full house...

     Iraq woes haunt Bush in Vietnan

     By Brian Barron BBC News, Saturday, 18 November 2006, 11:15 GMT

     When President Bush agreed months ago to attend the Apec summit in Vietnam, he may have pictured headlines about extending the hand of friendship to an old enemy. But instead, at the end of another week of distressing news from Iraq, many commentators are drawing uncomfortable parallels with Iraq.

     The high tech military superiority was overwhelming - just like US forces in Vietnam. These days the parallels seem to be multiplying.

     In Iraq, there has been a similar, disastrous lack of intelligence about the country and people - reminiscent of American mistakes in Indochina.

     Protests against the Iraq war have been more restrained than Vietnam In both conflicts, America's justifications for war were eventually discredited. Just as disturbing, was Washington's failure - initially at least - to learn from well-documented colonial blunders by the French in Vietnam and British in the 1920s in Iraq.

     As for pressure to hand over to Iraqi forces, that resembles Vietnamisation, training South Vietnamese forces to replace departing Americans.

     But by the end, 58,000 Americans were dead and more than one million Vietnamese soldiers and civilians.

     One big difference is that Vietnam poisoned the political mood of America, with tragic consequences.

     Whereas the USA today is not shaken by anti-war protests - instead a majority just voted with calm common sense for bringing an end to what now seems an even bigger foreign policy blunder than Vietnam - in a region of far greater strategic importance.

     Now, on the banks of the Tigris in Baghdad, a huge new American embassy is rising.

     I cannot help remembering its now-demolished monumental forerunner in Saigon, packed with the best and brightest CIA and military types, under Washington's proconsul.

     They proved powerless as the country around them disintegrated. To be fair about that final meltdown, the American expeditionary force had completed its withdrawal three years earlier. From half-a-million troops to zero.

     But it is the images of South Vietnam's death throes that endure - overladen helicopters abandoning a panic-stricken American ally.

     It was an exit strategy that failed ingloriously. For Mr Bush, the self-styled war president seeking a way out of the Iraq quagmire, his visit to what was Saigon, offers no comfort at all.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 11:47pm

211. hey bro, what's your source for that poll?

     Posted by WILL C. 11/19/2006 @ 11:27pm

     http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

     Yeah I remember when hsuB said that we didn't want to state a plan to draw down the troops because the terrorist (like that's what they are) would just wait until we left like they'd hold back attacking our troops until we left-- what the hell --- hsuB is the stupidest thing I know around--- YES TELL THE FUCKERS WE"RE LEAVING IN A YEAR AND LET THEM STOP ATTACKING OUR TROOPS FOR A YEAR! What's wrong with that? Oh of course-- they're not firing at the cowardly hsuB admin, if they were they'd be all over that 'time table'. Scum cowardhawks.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/19/2006 @ 11:58pm

212. Posted by RIO BRAVO 11/20/2006 @ 12:37am

     Unless you wanted even more US troops dead, per hating the US, and showing how it takes dems to save the day-- what's your point?

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 01:40am

213. Take it from an old Vietnamizer of the Vietnamese in Vietnam: Iraqifying the Iraqis in Iraq will not work. The mere thought of throwing more death and destruction at Deputy Dubya's delusional debacle ought to make an entire country of sentient life forms vomit. But then again, when speaking of America, one has to go easy on the unexamined assumptions about sentience.

     The Constitution gives the Power of the Purse to Congress specifically so that it will constrain militarily adventuresome princeling presidents who don't give a damn about what legislators "resolve" but only what they will fund. The Democratic Congress absolutely must disregard the monumental monstrosity of an "emergency" appropriation for the War on Iraq now looming as an obvious political trap set by Republicans desperate to hang ownership of the bloody boondoggle on the new guys. The Democratic Congress needs to hold its own regular military budget hearings and first decide how much to pay for the expeditious withdrawal of American forces from Iraq. Following that first order of business, the Democratic Congress must then decide which unnecessary porkbarrel weapons systems to trim. After that, the Democratic Congress can challenge the Cheney/Bush cabal of reactionary Jacobins to come up with additional revenues from the super-rich to fund not only back payment for war-costs already incurred but for any additionally contemplated military operations in Iraq outside the Democratic Plan for scheduled withdrawal. Naturally, the Republicans will refuse to tax the super rich to pay for anything, so -- with no money left for anything but withdrawal and normal military expenditures -- the President will have no choice but to redeploy the troops out of Iraq as directed by the people's elected representatives in Congress.

     If asked by anyone why they did not think of funding any more of the War on Iraq that Americans don't want, the Democrats can just use Alexander Hamilton's quip delivered to those who asked why the founding brothers of our Republic hadn't mentioned GAWD in the Constitution. Said Hamilton, impishly: "We forgot."

     Posted by Michael Murry at 11/20/2006 @ 04:35am

214. Posted by VVVENUS 11/19/2006 @ 1:57pm "And one might add, how come Spain and the UK suffered their worst terrorists attack during the time they were 'fighting the enemy in Iraq rather than on their home soil'?"

     The simple answer to this is that the perpetrators in both cases were not terrorists from Iraq. The Coalition was keeping them busy in Iraq and in the process had killed 4000 of them up until a few months ago (Al Qaeda's own numbers).

     So that is 4000 that will never be doing any further terrorising anywhere.

     The London July 2005, attack was carried out by British citizens of Pakistani descent who it is claimed were radicalised in visits to madrassas in Pakistan. They had no connection with Iraq. As Islamists they, like you but for different reasons, were offended by Iraq and Afghanistan but we don't expect any of you to start blowing up non-combatants.

     "The terrorist attack on the Madrid railway, 11th March 2004 was carried out, it seems by a somewhat shadowy group. There is still much controversy about who was involved. From Wikipedia the current official thinking is as follows:

     "Nowadays, Judge Del Olmo assigns the responsibility to "local cells of Islamic extremists inspired through the Internet", not Al-Qaeda, GIA or Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group. These local cells would consist of hash traffickers of Moroccan origin, remotely linked to an Al Qaeda cell already captured. These groups would have bought the explosives (dynamite Goma-2 ECO) from low-level thieves in Asturias (North of Spain) using money from the small scale drug trafficking."

     So once again neither the war in Iraq or the terrorists (from) Iraq are the cause of this bombing on the Madrid railway.

     The data of the many bombings by Islamists over the last few decades, all around the world, indicates that the involvement of a country in the Coalition of the Willing, has not made it more likely to be subjected to a terrorist attack, because of the war in Iraq, than for those who are not part of the CoW. Reports of the thwarting of potential terrorist attacks in non-CoW countries such as Germany are a further indication that there is a more fundamental reason than Iraq for the attacks.

     For Willie, whom I thought was better informed; the problem essentially is that Poseidon was wondering why countries like Japan and Norway, who he assumed were not involved in the CoW, had not been attacked since the beginning of the Iraq war. Well the reality is that there are about another 26 or so CoW members who also have not be attacked. That's why it is important to look at all the pre-war Islamic terrorist attacks because it clearly shows that Iraq has not increased the number of attacks on Western and other nations. (excluding Iraq).

     What Bush has right and you isolationist Yankees do not realise is that Islamic extremism is a world wide phenomena that is at war with much of what they see in secular and even religious Western culture as being morally reprehensible (ref bin Laden's 1998 ABC interview). Iraq and Afghanistan and US support of Israel etc etc, are metaphors for Western persecution of Islam, used by the radical Imams to radicalise young Muslims.

     This last testament of one of the London bombers may give you some idea of the scope of their complaint:

     Al Jazeera aired another taped message from one of the bombers - Shehzad Tanweer.

     He said:

     For the non-Muslims in Britain, you may wonder what you have done to deserve this. You are those who have voted in your government who in turn have and still continue to this day to oppress our mothers and children, brothers and sisters from the east to the west in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq and Chechnya. Your government has openly supported the genocide of more than 150,000 innocent Muslims in Fallujah.

     We are 100 per cent committed to the cause of Islam. We love death the way you love life. I tell all you British citizens to stop your support to your lying British government and to the so-called war on terror. And ask yourselves: why would thousands of men be ready to give their lives for the cause of Muslims?

     What you have witnessed now is only the beginning of a series of attacks which will intensify and continue until you pull all your troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Until you stop all financial and military support to the US and Israel and until you release all Muslim prisoners from Belmarsh and your other concentration camps. And know that if you fail to comply with this then know that this war will never stop and that we are willing to give our lives 100 times over for the cause of Islam. You will never experience peace until our children in Palestine, our mothers and sisters in Kashmir, and our brothers in Afghanistan and Iraq feel peace.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/20/2006 @ 04:48am

215. WILL C,

     This begs the question: Most importantly, if this nonsense was true, then in order to stop terrorism since the early '70s, America should have invaded every Arab Muslim country on earth. They therefore could have avoided Pan Am 103, The Barracks Bombings in Beirut, Black Hawk Down, in Somalia, The Terror Bombings in Saudi Arabia, and the Embassy attacks in Africa. Why didn't Bush invade Iraq Sept 12, 2001? Rightwingers are the stuff that late night comedians are made of.................

     ------------------------------------------------------------------- ah yes, the hamsterland fantasy: the only thing keeping the terrorists over there is our army deployed... over there.

     but then that's what brought them (the terrorists) over here in the first place.

     Posted by WILL C. 11/19/2006 @ 7:27pm | ignore this person

     only the fool and the conservative thinks the down trodden will not fight back... that they will never rise against the mighty

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/20/2006 @ 08:06am

216. MARLON2006,

     Sounds like a plan to me...............

     -------------------------------------------------------------------

     There is no such war anymore. What American soldiers are doing there is policing. Sitting there with rifles and taking a shot on your head is not a war.

     If US troops are left there, that will just attract more insurgents to kill them. Now the news everywhere is that Americans are in the run, therefore the enemy is sharp and ready to kick our but.

     The best thing to do now is to impeach Pres. Bush and Cheney. Then get out of there.

     Posted by MARLON2006

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/20/2006 @ 08:10am

217. MICHAEL MURRY,

     PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY HAVE TO TAKE THE BOLD STAND THAT AN IMPERIAL FOREIGN POLICY HURTS AMERICA:

     You are absolutely right. It is long past time for a changing of the paradigm on U.S. foreign policy. Everyone, regardless of party or political ideology, should take the position that it is not the job of America to decide what type of gov't Iraq has nor should America steal Iraq's oil. If these people want their society to survive, they should be smart enough to cut a deal amongst themselves.

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/20/2006 @ 08:15am

218. Jones you are an idiot. the offensive cartoons had nothing to do with Norway. that was Denmark.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/20/2006 @ 11:04am

219. Muslim nations are pure evil and growing more and more like Pre 1939 Germany more and more every day.

     and you Like sound more like Hitler every day with your hatemongering.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/20/2006 @ 11:08am

220. Silly buggers aren't you.

     why don't you shove this kind of stuff up your Aussie ass.

     I am aware that Rangel proposes a draft, and while I like him, I believe he could not be more wrong. NO FUCKING DRAFT. to give Bush MORE FUCKING SOLDIERS?

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/20/2006 @ 11:11am

221. Suppose JR has headed back to the other Aus. already?

     I am an american.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/20/2006 @ 11:12am

222. Posted by LRJONES4 11/20/2006 @ 04:48bm

     Jones IV, you do the terrorists' work for the hsuB admin by spreading their twisted logic to sustain your own. Pretty much throwing gasoline on the fire. You are part of the cause for the violence-- not the solution. Hope you're being paid well for your miniscule soul.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 12:52pm

223. Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/20/2006 @ 11:11am

     Calm down, JOHANN....it's a stunt by Rangel.

     Posted by Mask at 11/20/2006 @ 1:18pm

224. Asking too much-- ask the Iraqis, our military was never capable of being everywhere all the time. Iraq always needed a political solution and one too sophisticated for the hsuB admin to comprehend.

     By THOMAS WAGNER, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 6 minutes ago

     BAGHDAD, Iraq - Gunmen shot and killed a television comedian Monday who was famous for mocking everyone from the Iraqi government to U.S. forces to Shiite militias to Sunni insurgents.

     Walid Hassan's slaying came as the Iraqi death toll rose to more than 1,300 for the first 20 days of November -- the highest for any month since The Associated Press began tracking the figure in April 2005.

     In all, 22 Iraqis were killed Monday in a series of attacks in Baghdad, Ramadi and Baqouba, police said. The bodies of 26 Iraqis who had been kidnapped and tortured also were found on the streets of the capital, in Dujail to the north of Baghdad and in the Tigris River in southern Iraq.

     The Iraqi death toll this month is already well above the 1,216 who died in all of October, which had been the deadliest month in Iraq since the AP began its count.

     The actual totals are likely considerably higher because many deaths are not reported. Victims in those cases are quickly buried according to Muslim custom and never reach morgues or hospitals to be counted.

     In addition to the victims of violence, countless Iraqis have had close calls with death. Among them were two government officials who escaped assassination attempts Monday.

     Minister of State Mohammed Abbas Auraibi, a member of Iraq's Shiite majority, said a roadside bomb hit his convoy at about 9:30 a.m. as it was driving on a highway in eastern Baghdad. Two of his bodyguards were wounded.

     Hakim al-Zamily, a Shiite deputy health minister, also escaped unhurt when gunmen opened fire on his convoy in downtown Baghdad at noon, killing two of his guards, the minister said.

     On Sunday, suspected Sunni insurgents kidnapped another deputy health minister, Shiite Ammar al-Saffar, from his home in northern Baghdad. Officials said the gunmen wore police uniforms and arrived in seven vehicles to abduct al-Saffar, who was believed to be the most senior government official kidnapped in Iraq since the war began in March 2003.

     Al-Saffar was seized nearly a week after dozens of suspected Shiite militia gunmen in police uniforms kidnapped scores of people from a Ministry of Higher Education office in Baghdad. That ministry is predominantly Sunni.

     Monday's civilian victims included Hassan, an actor and comedian on Al-Sharqiyah TV who was shot while driving in western Baghdad. The motive for his slaying was unknown. Hassan had performed in a comedy series called "Caricature," which mocked coalition forces, insurgents, militias and Iraq's government.

     Assailants also shot to death Fulayeh al-Ghurabi, a Shiite professor at Babil University in the province south of Baghdad, as he was driving home at midday, police said.

     http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061120/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 3:54pm

225. And MacKane wants more troops in Iraq? Now that's asking a bit much considering what he's done for the hsuB admin. Although unlike the writer, I do not feel telling truth would be exploiting the circumstances:

     McCain and the Great Abramoff Cover-Up by dengre

     Sun Nov 19, 2006 at 09:12:40 PM PST

     McCain will not be the GOP nominee. He is too compromised and has too many enemies.

     And scandal will be a big part of McCain's fall.

     Unlike 2000, the Keating Five scandal will get Murtha/Abscam-like scrutiny and reveal a McCain who will bend the rules when it is in his interest.

     But the Abramoff Scandal will be the one to pull McCain down.

     That may sound odd, as McCain was not involved with Abramoff during Jack's lobbying career and led the Senate's Indian Affairs Committee investigation of Abramoff.

     Did I say investigation, I meant cover-up.

     From the start, McCain worked overtime to keep a lid on the most damaging aspects of the Abramoff scandal.

     As they say in Washington, the cover-up is always worse than the crime.

     VVVVVVVVVVVVV

     And no wonder the GOP is so scared of Henry Waxman as Head of the Government Reform Committee. He won't bury evidence like John McCain did.

     Indictments are coming. Some documents will come out, but not enough.

     We need to demand the release of the 700,000 pages of Abramoff documents intentionally hidden by John McCain.

     There will be special elections to fill the seats of those who follow DeLay, Cunningham and Ney into disgrace. And there will be dozens of 2008 Republican candidates closely tied to this scandal and cover-up. We need to be ready to exploit the Abramoff affair in ways we did not exploit it in 2006. One person who will forever be connected to Jack Abramoff is John McCain.

     We should hit him very hard on his work to cover-up the scandal and limit damage to his Party and his President, George W. Bush.

     It goes right to St. John's "maverick" image and destroys his strength..

     And once this story is out there, McCain's GOP opponents will lead the attack.

     We need to hold McCain accountable for following in the footsteps of George Wallace.

     And by that I mean McCain's pandering to assholes for their votes.

     http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/19/235337/63

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 4:15pm

226. Wow. Will repub idiocy never end? Who knows... But everything, except making record profits for buddy corporate war profiteers, that hsuB's done especially Iraq, already rings hollow. This seems a clear wish for those that 'hate' America's highest ideals/values and what it stands for as a member nation and so reminiscent of hsuB's idiotic "BRING IT ON!" chickenhawk rhetoric-- except now on a global scale that their Iraq failure will pale to this Cheney inspired out:

     Bomb Iran

     Diplomacy is doing nothing to stop the Iranian nuclear threat; a show of force is the only answer.

     By Joshua Muravchik, JOSHUA MURAVCHIK is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. November 19, 2006

     WE MUST bomb Iran.

     It has been four years since that country's secret nuclear program was brought to light, and the path of diplomacy and sanctions has led nowhere.

     VVVVVVVVVVVVV

     If Ahmadinejad gets his finger on a nuclear trigger, everything Bush has done will be rendered hollow. We will be a lot less safe than we were when Bush took office.

     Finally, wouldn't such a U.S. air attack on Iran inflame global anti-Americanism? Wouldn't Iran retaliate in Iraq or by terrorism? Yes, probably. That is the price we would pay. But the alternative is worse.

     After the Bolshevik takeover of Russia in 1917, a single member of Britain's Cabinet, Winston Churchill, appealed for robust military intervention to crush the new regime. His colleagues weighed the costs -- the loss of soldiers, international derision, revenge by Lenin -- and rejected the idea.

     The costs were avoided, and instead the world was subjected to the greatest man-made calamities ever. Communism itself was to claim perhaps 100 million lives, and it also gave rise to fascism and Nazism, leading to World War II. Ahmadinejad wants to be the new Lenin. Force is the only thing that can stop him.

     http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-muravchik 19nov19,0,1681154.story?coll=la-opinion-center

     Cheney (go fuck yourself and I'll shoot you in the face too) says-- JUST KILL THEM ALL. USE THE BIG GUNS!

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 6:17pm

227. Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/20/2006 @ 11:04am

     Well at least you knew JR. I was waiting for the others to pick it up. Just wondering if anyone on this thread was informed.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/20/2006 @ 6:42pm

228. Misinform to educate-- that's classic hsuB/Rove/GOP logic...

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 6:56pm

229. Jones IV, you do the terrorists' work for the hsuB admin by spreading their twisted logic to sustain your own. Pretty much throwing gasoline on the fire. You are part of the cause for the violence-- not the solution. Hope you're being paid well for your miniscule soul.

     Posted by HSUBFOOLS 11/20/2006 @ 12:52am |

     I'm really getting to like you fools. Willie used to be my favourite therapist but you certainly do have an insight into the real me.

     Would like to spend more time with you today but some of us are needed to keep the wheels of industry turning. But don't fret I'll be back.

     By the way do you know where the paymaster's office is on Pennsylvania Avenue.?

     Posted by lrjones4 at 11/20/2006 @ 7:05pm

230. "I'm really getting to like you fools."

     this kind of crap will get you ignored.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/20/2006 @ 7:14pm

231. KO/Countdown just nailed hsuB ass to Vietnamized Iraq.

     We won the cold war by leaving Vietnam and we'll win the war on terror by leaving Iraq and growing stronger; not letting the hsuB/repub neocans make America weaker.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 8:48pm

232. Jones, I realize that I have misconstrued your post. it was, I see now, "you" singular. the management regrets the error.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/20/2006 @ 9:52pm

233. Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/20/2006 @ 9:52pm

     Yep, I think it's all about me. Those guys down under are funny that way.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 10:42pm

234. Wow, war, corruption, world events out the wazoo and 4 news stations dedicated to what's the top news the public need to hear and they're all about OJ Simpson! MSM is pitiful.

     Posted by hsuBfools at 11/20/2006 @ 10:43pm

235. VVVENUS,

     I have no idea what on Earth you gibberish you are blabbering about.

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/19/2006 @ 7:24pm | ignore this person

     Sorry I didn't make it clearer in my post that I was agreeing with you, not arguing.

     The point I was trying to make was that our presence in Iraq in no way prevented angry young men in Spain and GB from perpetrating terrorist attacks, which only proves that the propagandist catchphrase ‘we have to fight them there lest they come here' is complete and utter nonsense, designed to justify an act of unnecessary aggression.

     Have a good day.

     Mariam

     Posted by vvvenus at 11/21/2006 @ 01:46am

236. Back on-topic.....

     Apparently "future President" Obama has come out with HIS plan for Iraq...

     Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who is contemplating a run for the presidency, yesterday called for a "gradual and substantial" reduction of U.S. forces from Iraq that would begin in four to six months.

     Speaking to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Mr. Obama envisioned a flexible timetable for withdrawal linked to conditions on the ground in Iraq and based on the advice of U.S. commanders. He also called for intensified efforts to train Iraqi security forces, U.S. aid packages tied to Iraqi progress in reducing sectarian violence and new diplomacy with Syria and Iran.

     "I believe that it remains possible to salvage an acceptable outcome to this long and misguided war," he said. "But it will not be easy. For the fact is that there are no good options left in this war."

     Mr. Obama was not in the Senate when President Bush sought and received support from Congress in 2002 to use military force against then-dictator Saddam Hussein. But he has publicly opposed the war since then.

     Mr. Obama was careful not to set a specific timetable for withdrawal of troops, the Associated Press reports.

     Inside Politics-Greg Pearce

     Posted by Mask at 11/21/2006 @ 08:40am

237. "I'm really getting to like you fools."

     a comma would have made all the difference.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/21/2006 @ 09:17am

238. MASK,

     Why do intelligent people take this clown seriously? Barack Obama himself is an inside the beltway creation. Flexible timetable with no hard dates based on conditiosn on the ground? His rhetoric is merely "stay the course" in a different language. All politicians take all Americans for being fools. Some of us are, to be sure, but jeez, does he think he is talking to all newborns?

     ------------------------------------------------------------------- Back on-topic.....

     Apparently "future President" Obama has come out with HIS plan for Iraq...

     Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who is contemplating a run for the presidency, yesterday called for a "gradual and substantial" reduction of U.S. forces from Iraq that would begin in four to six months.

     Speaking to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Mr. Obama envisioned a flexible timetable for withdrawal linked to conditions on the ground in Iraq and based on the advice of U.S. commanders. He also called for intensified efforts to train Iraqi security forces, U.S. aid packages tied to Iraqi progress in reducing sectarian violence and new diplomacy with Syria and Iran.

     "I believe that it remains possible to salvage an acceptable outcome to this long and misguided war," he said. "But it will not be easy. For the fact is that there are no good options left in this war."

     Mr. Obama was not in the Senate when President Bush sought and received support from Congress in 2002 to use military force against then-dictator Saddam Hussein. But he has publicly opposed the war since then.

     Mr. Obama was careful not to set a specific timetable for withdrawal of troops, the Associated Press reports.

     Inside Politics-Greg Pearce

     Posted by MASK

     Posted by POSEIDON at 11/21/2006 @ 11:41am

239. Obama=flavor of the month.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/21/2006 @ 11:49am

240. I'm not endorsing the guy, just reporting what he said. And I agree with both of you...but as noted before, politics IS perception. And if the perception is "Obama is the 'Star of the Future'"....then he IS going to get listened to.

     Posted by POSEIDON 11/21/2006 @ 11:41am

     Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/21/2006 @ 11:49am

     Posted by Mask at 11/21/2006 @ 12:52pm

241. I welcome Obana, but he will have to prove himself in the glare of the attention he is receiving. and those ears.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/21/2006 @ 1:46pm

242. and those ears.

     Posted by JOHANNESROLF 11/21/2006 @ 1:46pm

     Isn't that a bit like those on the Right who mocked Kerry for his "horse face"?

     Posted by Mask at 11/21/2006 @ 2:22pm

243. Don't talk about the man's ears. That's kinda immature.

     Posted by edwriter at 11/21/2006 @ 4:14pm

244. ed, why? no one had any problem pointing out how handsome JFK was.

     Posted by johannesrolf at 11/21/2006 @ 4:39pm

245. Gee, I don't know, let's see ... how about we put the lying pricks that caused all this death and destruction on trial, beg for the worlds forgiveness for being such fools for allowing our government to fall into the hands of even bigger fools, pay for the repairs for the damage we've done (sorry, about all the dead) than maybe, just maybe we might not suffer the full wrath of the world we so justly deserve.

     But I doubt it.

     Posted by Gonnuts at 11/22/2006 @ 9:32pm