As I type this, it is just two hours until President will be presenting his Grand New Plan for the Victory in Iraq.
I expect it to be a complete hoot, one worthy of more than a little MST3K type of snark.
We already pretty much know what he's going to say (We're headed head-long for a Brick Wall er "Surge"), and what's he's not going to say ("The ISG, Shinseki and the Generals on the Ground, Chuck Hagel, John Murtha, John Kerry, Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy have been right all along") - so why don't have some fun with it all?
(This post will be frequently updated as the speech approaches)
First off I want us all to contemplate this - a Map of where our 3000 Iraq Casualties have come from so far.
Next time someone tries to claim the Blue States haven't given their fair share of blood for Bush's Bogus War - send them this JPG and a link to this site.
On CNN I've watched both the Democratic and Republican leaders after getting their heads-up on the speech.
Pelosi : This was a notification, not an consultation.
McConnell : We support the President
And so the showdown between Dems, Moderate (and still sane) Republicans and the Neo-Con Wing-nuts begins to move into it's next phase.
Earlier today I posted the following on Democratic Underground which I think bears re-posting now.
The main problem with a "Surge" is that it's just doesn't include enough troops to get the job done.
Counter-insurgency operations require at least 20 combat troops per 1000 people in a given area. And look closely. That's not just military personnel, but combat troops.... u'd need 120,000 combat troops to mount real counter-insurgency operations just in Baghdad. We currently have 70,000 combat troops in the whole country. So concentrate all US combat personnel in Iraq into Baghdad. Then add 20,000 more 'surge' combat troops. That leaves you 30,000 short of the number the Army thinks you'd need just in Baghdad.
And it's certainly clear we don't have 120,000 combat ready troops to spare, not right now. This "Super-Surge" idea which is essentially what Gen. Shinseki argued we needed at the very start of the Iraq War - has now been embraced not just by John McCain, but also Lindsey Graham and even Dick Morris.
If 120,000 is what we need and we don't have it - we'll need to get those troops elsewhere. If we hadn't completely fubar'd the training of Iraqi Troops, and could trust them not to engage in sectarian internecine warefare we'd have more than enough of what we need.
But we don't.
If we could trust the Saudi's to come in a create a bulwark to protect the Sunni's - we possibly have enough if the presence of even more foreign troops wouldn't drive the Iraqi even further over the edge.
But we can't.
The one option left to us - is Diplomacy. We need to sit down and start having some serious talks with al-Maliki, and the Sadr Sect of the Iraqi government. We need to talk about Insurgent Amnesty. We may need to talk about Partitioning the Country (and the Iraqi Security forces) and establishing a Senate with equal reqpresentation from each the three major factions, Kurd, Sunni and Shia. We may need to include the Saudis, Iranians, Turkish and Syrians in these talks.
We need to put al-Qaeda in Iraq on the back burner. Zarqawi is long dead. Saddam is dead. It's time to look toward the future and it won't be easy, especially since this is the very last thing anyone expects President Bush to recommend tonight.
The bottom line is this, if there truly is a method that America can pull it's fanny out of this fire, and in the process leave a stable, non-extremist and prosporous Iraq behind -- the one person we can't trust to effectively implement that strategy is George W. Bush.
His track record is abysmal. He started a war based on a Fraud, a Fogery and a Liar. He has utterly failed in how he has persued this war at every single level. Although he has shifted around the guards at the gate, with a new SecDef and new Commanders on the Ground - he remains the Deciderer In Chief.
With his final rip and run memo, Rumsfeld proved he was never quite the idiot he was pretending to be over the last six years. Stephen Hadley has already shown that BushCo has little confidence in al-Maliki, but he's sure to run that tattered flag up the pole one more time tonight. So what is this elborate Kabuke really about anyway?
Are they just Running out the Clock until the Next Administration as Joe Biden has posited? Doubling-Down or just Bluffing the Democrats to pull the Surge Protection Trigger that Sen. Ted Kennedy revealed yesterday?
"Do you really want us to Win?" the Neo-cons will inevitably ask.
But is this about rejecting defeatism and "surging" to a victory that "hasn't occured yet" or simply failing to recognize a defeat that was inevitable due to a terminally flawed War effort from start to finish?
The counter question to the Neo-Cons of course is - "How long are we supposed continue with a failed policy - when that map above is completely covered in red dots?"
The time for combat has passed - the time for true Diplomacy with and between the various Iraqi factions - Sunni, Shia and Kurds - has arrived. We need a cease fire and call for "Neutral Corners" ala the Biden Partitioning plan. And has been shown by Governor Richardson today, and Senator Mitchell in Northern Ireland - Democrats and honest Republicans don't need to wait until security has been established first before they start brokering peace and they don't need the President's approval or support to implement effective Diplomacy, especially when it's clear that he's incapable of either winning the War or establishing the Peace.
We'll have a much clearer picture of things in 90 mins (and counting).
First UP on the Live Blogging Block : Hard Ball
Vyan
Update: 16:45 pm Chris Matthews just announced on Hard Ball that the British are sending home 3000 of their troops from Iraq. So we've got a negative-surge going on already.
Matthews : "The Heart of True Conservatives was never behind this war" (Yeah, right - sure it wasn't. This comment just shows that "Operation: Blame Shift" is already in full swing)
Update: 17:00 Matthews on Olbermann :We've been here before [had this level of troops] - just last year. It's like Groundhogs Day.
Olbermann: If it's just "Trust me" again, the "Trust Me bank" is pretty thin.
Update: 17:02 Olbermann. Pelosi: This is the third time we've done this - why are we doing it again?
Olbermann: [Republican] Senators Brownback, Voinovich and Coleman have all jumped ship [away from the Bush/McCain Surge Plan] just today!
Update 17:20 Crooks and Liars has an ABC Report Posted - The Surge has already started
President Bush's speech may be scheduled for tonight, but the troop surge in Iraq is already under way. ABC News has learned that the "surge" Bush is expected to announce in a prime time speech tonight has already begun. Ninety advance troops from the 82nd Airborne Division arrived in Baghdad today.
An additional battalion of roughly 800 troops from the same division are expected to arrive in Baghdad Thursday.
Update 17:24 Turley on Countdown : [The Founders] didn't want the President or the Congress to "go it alone". The President needs about $7 Billion [From Congress], they can refuse. The question is whether they have the intestinal fortitude to do it [Force a Presidential Veto of the Defense Appropriations]. Bush is unlikely to try and steal funds from other appropriations for his Iraqi Surge (V: However, I will interject that Clinton has already set the precedent for highly creative financing of the Government when the Gingrich Congress refused to raise the Dept Ceiling in 1996 and force a total Governmental Shutdown to avoid our going into default on our loans. IMO This President is not going to want to look like a "wimp" compared to the way Clinton handled the Republican Congress.)
Update 17:35 Tony Snow on the R-Rated Ring tone of a White House Reporter : "Play that funky music - White Girl!"
Update 17:38 Crooks and Liars on Nora O'Donnel carrying the White House Water.
I meant to get this up earlier. Are we to believe that the American people need to be educated suddenly about the Iraq conflict? For months, Bush has been screeching that Iraq is the central front of the war on terror. Have we suddenly missed that? What can he possibly educate us about? He's supposed to explain why he wants to implement the McCain Doctrine against the wishes of the American people. It's insulting and Norah should know better.
P.S.Keith is ON FIRE - with a mini-Special Comment listing all of the President previous failures of Credibiilty! Go Keith GO!
Howard Fineman : Wow. [In response to Keith's exhaustive list of Bush's Iraq War Fuck-ups] The President doesn't have much credibility at all does he?
Update 17:43 Paul Reikoff from IAVA: The President doesn't understand the enemy that we're fighting. It may help for a short time, but if you want to increase troops you need to do it by hundreds of thousands. This War's been done on the cheap thruout. People going back for a third tour is really unprecedented. We have more stress disorders, divorces and suicides [among our troops]. They feel that this is more of a political move, their tied of these half moves. People are calling this a "Hail Mary", if we're going to go with football analogies, this is a "Draw Play" - it's even more stupid than a "Hail Mary".
Worse Persons in the World - #3 Glenn Beck (Keith should admit he's a "Liberal" - #2 John McCain ("Iraq war was Easy, and we were greated as liberators") - #1 Gretchen Carson of Fox News ("Ted Kennedy is an Hostile Enemy" of the U.S. for suggesting that the Congress give prior approval of any Surge)
Pre-speech leak - The President Will Say : "Where mistakes have been made, the Responsibility rests with me"
No Shit Sherlock
Update 18:02 Matthews : They [the Neo-cons] wants us there forever, as a permanent constabulary in the region. This is the President's second to last chance [with this War] I don't think it will generate stability.
Update 18:04 Bush is on:"The Iraq election was an amazing feat, and we hoped that it would unify the nation - and allow their forces to take over for ours - we were wrong."
He blames al-Qaeda for the bombing of the Golden Mosque and "fomenting" sectarian violence. He blames Iran for supporting insurgents.
"Failure in Iraq would be a Disaster for the United States. Our enemies would have safe haven in which to plan and launch attacks against the United States" (You mean like the one that already have in Pakistan?)
"Only Iraqis can end the Sectarian Violence. There were not enough forces to clear and hold." (You mean Shinseki's original plan for 500,000 troops - before you forced him to retire?!)
"Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations, going door to door so that they will get to know their people in the neighborhood" (This is like the Community-police state plan?)
"Why is this plan different from the previous plans? This time we will have the forces level required to Hold areas that have been cleared" (No, you won't sparky)
"This new strategy will not put an immediate end to suicide troops, sniper attacks or suicide bombings" (So - why bother?)
"If the Iraqi Government does not act - they will lose the support of the American People".
"Reducing the violence in Baghdad will help toward meaningful reconcilliation."
"The Iraqi Government will share Oil Revenues with the people".
"Recently tribal forces have shown their willingness to fight al-Qaeda". (Good for them, whose going to protect them from the other tribes?)
"America took away Al-Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanstan" (They Did?!) "And we will not allow them to establish one in Iraq."
"Will America redraw and allow the Insurgents and terrorist to succeed, or will we stand with the Iraqis people who wish freedom?"
"Victory will not look like it did for our forefathers" (No, it'll look like it did for Clinton in Bosnia when he fought and defeated Al-Qaeda there while resolving a sectarian conflict as complex and deadly as this one. But then, he didn't go it alone!)
"We will form a new bi-partisan working group to help win the war on terror, working with members of Congress including Sen Joe Lieberman". (Ugh!)
"Those who oppose this strategy, need to provide alternatives which they believe will work better." (No, they don't - you're the decider remember?)
"Our cause in Iraq is noble and neccesary"
"Thruout our history America has always defied pessimism"
Update 18:28 Olberman: Interesting that the only legislator Bush mentioned by name was Liebermann.
Durbin in Response: Now in the fourth year [of the war], it's time for the Iraqis to stand and defend their own nation. The Iraqis must understand that they alone can bring their freedom. They must understand that everytime they dial 9-11 they can not just order up another 20,000 American troops
It's been four years since we voted on the Iraq Force Resolution. Every element of that resolution is no longer operative. There were no WMD's and Saddam Hussein is now gone. (Yeah, I called that one - HJ 141 needs to be repealed)
Matthews: [Durbin's message was] "We won, let's come home" (Damn, Straight)
Update 18:39 Scarburough : 20,000 Troops is not enough. Dick Durbin was wise to argue that "We've already given enough".
Update 18:49 Obama is on. : We may get 51 votes [on a non-binding resolution] against the surge, but we need to do more than that. We will not strand our troops in Iraq, we will make sure they have all the resources neccesary. There have to consequences for [the Iraqis] failures to meet benchmarks.
Obama: My suspicion is that it won't end up being a Constitutional issue, but there are issues of how do we Constrain a President with a wrong-headed policy? What I indicated to Sec. Rice is that I don't consider this a Democratic or Republican problem - I'm open to crafting a solution [across party lines].
Full Text of Speech - Video and Report from MSNBC.
Update 19:12 Pat Buchanan on Scarburough: Nobody is going to stop this "Surge", the President is going to get this chance - and I think it's going to be the last one.
Lawrence O'Donnell: I think the Presidents position is a real losing position. Let's go through the math, if you're saying another 21,000 troops in Iraq - we've already had that many troops in Iraq. If you assume all of those troops get to sleep you have no more than 5,000 additional troops at any one time. There are 45,000 police officers patroling the streets of New York, this is nothing.
Update 19:33: Hillary Finally gets off the Pot: I can not support the President's proposed Escalation of the Iraq War. (Oh shit.. it's on now!)