Skip to main content

When George W. Bush announced the escalation of his war in January, he said:

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not. Well, here are the differences...In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time...Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

And from today's Washington Post:

A department of the Iraqi prime minister's office is playing a leading role in the arrest and removal of senior Iraqi army and national police officers, some of whom had apparently worked too aggressively to combat violent Shiite militias, according to U.S. military officials in Baghdad.

Yet another failure by the Maliki government to live up to the promises George Bush made on their behalf, but this time it is a failure that will cost both American and Iraqi lives.  

Yesterday, Condoleezza Rice, while defending George Bush's upcoming veto of the supplemental spending bill that would require the Iraqi government to meet the benchmarks set out by Bush, said:

The problem is that if you try and make consequences about these benchmarks, you're tying the hands of General Petreaus and the hands of Ambassador Crocker.

So, there will be no consequences for the failures of the Iraq government.  Again.  But who is paying the price?

Four U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq over the weekend, the military said on Monday, raising the number of American troops killed this month to over 100 and making April one of the deadliest of the war for U.S. forces.

One-hundred and three killed, to be precise.   Since the official start of Bush's escalation, 222 U.S. soldiers have been killed.  And while we know that thousands of Iraqis have been killed during that same time, the exact number will never be known since the Iraqi government now refuses to release those numbers.  Those are consequences.

This what the Republican Party will be endorsing this week when they stand behind George Bush's veto.  

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:41 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  And the consequence (13+ / 0-)

    those veto-sustainers will face is explaining that vote when they run again.  

    "...We were wrong, terribly wrong. We owe it to future generations to explain why." --Robert McNamara, In Retrospect (1995)

    by mspicata on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:36:25 AM PDT

    •  keep fighting boy (5+ / 0-)

      victory is around the corner

      if this was so incredibly tragic it would be a scene right out of Duck Soup

      He may talk like an idiot, and look like an idiot, but don't let that fool you: he really is an idiot...Groucho Marx

      by distributorcap on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:17:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Iraqi Generals = US Attorneys (0+ / 0-)

      The attorn - I mean Generals went after too many Repub - I mean Shiites, and they serve at Bu - I mean Maliki's pleasure because they're political appointees, so you see there's really no scandal at all!

      So there's absolutely nothing to see here. This is politics as usual in Iraq. Why are you inventing a failure? Those Generals are political appointees and they serve at the pleasure of the President - their competence and ability to do the job have absolutely nothing to do with anything. It's perfectly fine if Maliki wanted to fire them for not pursuing his enemi - I mean priorities. Nothing at all improper about firing the only generals who happened to be doing a good job at going after Republican Croo - I mean Shiite death squads.... nothing improper at all!

  •  Damn, Barb, (13+ / 0-)

    I wish you and others weren't forced to do this every damn day!

    When will enough be enough??

  •  Didn't someone say "Mission Accomplished." (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, aaraujo, potownman
    •  I think it was: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      groggy, pickandshovel

      "Major Combat Operations Have Ended," but you're close.

      Politics is the deliberation of one's moral enterprise.

      by Omen on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:56:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And I bet that show cost more than a $400 haircut (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:


      "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter." Dr. ML King, from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963.

      by bewert on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:45:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We're fast approaching the straw (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      koNko, bonesy, phonegery

      that breaks the camel's back.  At least I hope so.  The only thing that can keep this (mal)administration from toppling is if the Democrats waver in their resolve.  

      Thus the importance of Congress to continue  the investigations and subpoenas.

      I've been leaning away from impeachment, mainly because it will give the Rethugs the opportunity to loudly screech "politically-motivated" and because we don't have the votes to impeach.

      However, my gut has been screaming, "impeach!"  Why? Because Americans are dying in Iraq. Americans are still languishing in the aftermath of Katrina. Americans are paying over 3 dollars a gallon to enrich Bush's cronies - and the list goes on and on.

      We "surged" to the polls in November of last year to elect this Congress and Senate. So far, they've been doing their job. But, I'm afraid of "Investigation fatigue."  

      Bush and his cronies are genius at obfuscating what would and should be slam-dunk charges of corruption, cronyism and collusion.

      So, to our Democratic Congress and Senate Critters: Don't let up on these guys. Keep piling it on. It's only a matter of time before we find that one straw that makes the whole fetid pile crumble.

  •  Just raise your hands and salute, Bu$hCo's (6+ / 0-)

    biographical film has already been made.

    "Our knobs go up to 11."

    by Cartoon Peril on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:40:08 AM PDT

  •  "Over 100" vs. "One-hundred and three killed" (5+ / 0-)

    Morally speaking, the difference between these two expresses two different ways of looking at human life.

    Grammatically speaking, it should be "more than 100." Maybe accurate grammar can reorient a traumatically broken moral compass.

    •  As Stalin said, 1 death is a tragedy... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cartoon Peril, phonegery, moosely2006

      1 million deaths are only a statistic.  This WH, despite its self-proclaimed "Christian" perspective, takes the Stalin view on this subject as long as the deaths aren't suffered by wealthy people.

      Some men see things as they are and ask why. I see things that never were and ask why not?

      by RFK Lives on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:28:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wasn't Hitler the one who said (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        that the Turks massacred the Armenians in 1915 and no one remembered or cared?  Conventional wisdom offers this as part of his rationale for his Final Solution, that in 50 years no one would care about a bunch of massacred Jews.
        Of course, history has proven him wrong but I am afraid that GWB has a similar view of history's amnesia.  

  •  "If you try and make consequences about these (4+ / 0-)

    benchmarks" -- oh, you didn't think we were serious, did you? No Condi, we didn't.

    •  To pick up where you left off.. (5+ / 0-)

      ".. you're tying the hands of General Petreaus and the hands of Ambassador Crocker."

      Condi and the whole administration are so intellectually dishonest. Let's be real here. They got us into this, for 5 years they mismanaged it to a point beyond recovery, and they would rather see any number of both U.S. forces and Iraqi citizens die than face the truth, that they have tied their own hands and ours to this sorry excuse for a foreign policy.

  •  We need to end the war. (8+ / 0-)

    Dems need to keep sending the bill back.  No backing down.

    We need to be in the streets this summer.

    "We've got to save America from this President." John Edwards 4/3/07

    by TomP on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:41:15 AM PDT

  •  Looks like now would be a good time (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, Cartoon Peril, moosely2006

    to have a Plan B.

    "She was very young,he thought,...she did not understand that to push an inconvenient person over a cliff solves nothing." -1984

    by aggressiveprogressive on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:41:38 AM PDT

  •  "One signature away from ending this war" (6+ / 0-)

    It's no secret, I'm an Obama fan, but... I've still gotta say, that's one of the best lines I've heard yet to describe the situation we face.

    IMHO, we already won the war.  We won it when we toppled Saddam Hussein.   I don't think we should've ever been there in the first place, but that was the point of the war, and it is now done.

    The current war -- the civil war -- is something we never agreed to, cannot win without overwhelming force, and frankly... is not our business.  

    We broke it, that's true.  But it's the Iraqis who are now breaking it into tinier and tinier pieces, ones that will that will be harder and harder to ever glue together again.  

    It's time to get the hell out.  If they want to keep breaking it, that's their business.  But our fighting men and women shouldn't be there, getting broken themselves in the crossfire.  

  •  Could just one (9+ / 0-)

    person in the MSM -- Washington Press Corps -- ask this Administration what the point of benchmarks are if there are no consequences?

    The only "benchmark" they are concerned with is the Iraqi oil legislation which will line the pockets of Exxon/Mobil et al.

    "What journalism in America chiefly suffers from today is the lack of alert and competent professional criticism." H.L. Mencken 1927

    by gchaucer2 on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:44:12 AM PDT

    •  "Benchmarks"= HRC-ese for "surrender to Bu$hCo." (0+ / 0-)

      "Our knobs go up to 11."

      by Cartoon Peril on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:49:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, someone did (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lumpenprole, moosely2006, gchaucer2

      From the April 26, 2006 White House presser:

      Q Dana, the President has often said that he understands the patience of the American people is not unlimited. But should we interpret that to mean that patience should extend to the end of his term?

      MS. PERINO: What the President has asked is that -- he understood last November that people wanted a change in the war. He himself said he wasn't satisfied with the way that it was going. And so he took pains to have a comprehensive review in order to create the Baghdad Security Plan now being implemented by David Petraeus. What the President has asked for is for the Congress to give -- and the American people to give this plan a chance to work.

      And what you heard from David Petraeus this week -- I'm sorry, I should call him General Petraeus -- is that he doesn't have all the troops there that he's asked for. That should be about mid-June, he said, when they will all get there. They're having small signs of success, the sectarian violence is down, but we have the spectacular bombings from al Qaeda. And he said that sometimes, you start to -- he can see progress on the ground, but that can be overtaken by one spectacular bombing by al Qaeda in a major market that kills hundreds of people. And these are not just -- this is not just killing of American troops. These are innocent men, women, and children of Iraq who are trying to go about their daily lives.

      And the American troops are there to help try to protect them and to allow this new government to get the de-Baathification law finished, and get the oil law finished. And we understand that it's very difficult for them, but we also -- I can assure you that the President is constantly in contact with Prime Minister Maliki, pressuring him and pushing him and showing him how to lead that country so that it can be one that can sustain, defend, and govern itself.

      Q Dana, why isn't it working? I mean, General Petraeus talks about -- the security situation is obvious. But what has to happen here is for the political track to kick in. It hasn't. How do you expect the American people to have patience with Maliki again? This is where we were last year.

      MS. PERINO: Well, I think if you listen to David Petraeus, it's not exactly where we were last year, and that he has said the sectarian violence is down by a third.

      Q But Maliki has not made that much progress.

      MS. PERINO: There has been some progress. And granted -- and President -- we recognize that there are many issues, like those three that I just mentioned -- the de-Baathification law, and the oil law, and the provisional regional elections -- provincial elections -- has not moved forward fully, it's not finalized. But there has been progress and steps forward.

      Q But isn't that the key to all of this?

      MS. PERINO: It is key. It is absolutely key. But I think that everyone should keep in mind, we have a fully functioning democracy that's been in place for 200 years. Our Congress, it took them five years to pass one energy bill.

      Q The President told the American people and addressed Maliki in January that the time for this to happen, this political progress, was now. What does that mean?

      MS. PERINO: And I think that they are starting to make some progress. The oil law has now --

      Q How long is now?

      MS. PERINO: I'm sorry?

      Q How long is "now"? What does "now" mean? What's the President --

      MS. PERINO: The President has said -- well, I think the way that I would look at it is that the President has said, we're going to try the surge to try the -- to quell the violence there in Baghdad so that the government can have a little bit more time. And as I've just told you, General Petraeus said they're just about two months into the surge, and they don't have -- he doesn't have all the troops there that he wants, and it's going to take a while.

      And as I said yesterday, General Petraeus will provide an assessment towards the fall, and that's, I think, when -- I think that's how I would look at the time frame.

      Q But the issue is, is there pressure on this administration to turn around and walk out? Does this administration feel that pressure?

      MS. PERINO: I think the President feels pressure to accomplish the mission, fulfill the mission that he's promised to the troops and to their families, and -- why are you looking at me like that?

      Q I understand, but you're not answering --
      MS. PERINO: I'm answering your question.

      Q Not really. The pressure is to turn things around. He hasn't turned it around.

      MS. PERINO: April, what I'm saying is that the surge, as General David Petraeus explained today, he doesn't have all the troops that he has said that he will need in order to fulfill his mission. And so the pressure is to let that process get underway and let the troops get there so that they can fulfill it.

      Q That will take 10 years, and the American public is not going to wait --

      MS. PERINO: It's not going to take 10 years. He said they'd be there by mid-June, April.

      Q No, no, no, to turn things around -- you're saying it's going to happen immediately --

      MS. PERINO: No, none of us have said it's going to happen immediately. We have said that we are up against a very determined enemy. This is a sworn enemy of the United States who are being helped by other sworn enemies of the United States. This is very serious. We are deluding ourselves if we think that we walk away, that everything is going to be okay, and that we can just let that region fester and not have any consequences for it, and not have to suffer the consequences of our actions here in Washington. And that is why the President has the principled stand that he does. And he is the Commander-in-Chief, with the long-term national security interests of this country in mind with every step of the way.


      Q The General today said that, essentially, this is not an open-ended commitment. He talked about the American clock ticking. He talked about in September he'll give an assessment. And he was asked if he thinks it's not working, will he tell the truth, and will he say we should get out of there, and he said, yes, I will tell the truth about that.
      MS. PERINO: As one would expect.

      Q Right. So is the White House prepared for a report like that in September, where he comes back and says, we should leave and --

      MS. PERINO: We are very clear-eyed about the situation, and we are also very heartened and honored that General David Petraeus is leading this mission.

      Q Again, though, I'd have to say, is the President determined to stay there, no matter how many options he runs out of?

      MS. PERINO: The President is determined to win in Iraq. I think that the bill that they sent us today is mission defeated. And the President wants us to win in Iraq, not only just for the long-term security interests of this nation, but because 12 million people in Iraq came out and they voted, and they wanted a new government and they wanted a constitution. And they said -- they wanted -- they thanked us for allowing them that opportunity, and now we have a responsibility to help that young government stabilize, to get themselves some laws that will get on the books, and will establish some political reconciliation.

      Granted, Martha, this is very tough going; it is slow going. But we have to have slow, focused, persistent work, and encouraging patience on behalf of the American people. As you said, there's a -- there's this talk about an American clock versus an Iraqi clock, and sometimes the two don't tick at the same time.

      Q I have one more about the oil law, de-Baathification, the constitution stuff. Is it your thought that if there was no terrorist element in Iraq right now, if al Qaeda all packed up and went wherever home is, would the Iraqi government have oil and de-Baathification and constitutional issues worked out, what, weeks, months?

      MS. PERINO: Jim, I'm not going to answer that hypothetical, because al Qaeda is in Iraq. They have said this is the battle for them to win.

      Q Let me rephrase that. What is a reasonable period of time for the American people to expect the Iraqi government to work out these critical measures of political accomplishment?

      MS. PERINO: I'm not going to start the stop watch on the Iraqi government. We encourage them to do it soon.

      Q When you say that, you're not going to then, nobody -- then it's again -- it's going to go on forever.

      MS. PERINO: No, it's not. Listen, the Iraqis also want progress, and they want it fast.

      Q But there's been lots of reports this week that say, regardless of the terrorist activity, there are people inside the Iraqi government who are saying, you know what, this just isn't going to happen. So therefore, you have American troops in Iraq, essentially to reach goals that are unreachable.

      MS. PERINO: I think that even in our Congress, you can find people who say that we're never going to get an immigration bill this year, or we're never going to be able to get No Child Left Behind reauthorized. Look, we're all working towards it. This is a new democracy, and I think that they deserve a little bit of time to be able to get things done. That's what our -- that's what we offer our Congress, as well.

      Q But you can't define "a little bit of time."

      MS. PERINO: I'm not going to do that to them.

      Go ahead.

      Q Dana --

      MS. PERINO: Let me go to Ben.

      Q Part of the Democratic plan is to hold the Iraqi government accountable. And the President often talks about accountability, not just in foreign policy, but how lawmakers should conduct themselves, how elected officials should spend the public's money, and I'm wondering, where is the accountability in the President's plan? You talked about in pressuring Maliki, patience is not unlimited, but where's the accountability? Where's the teeth to it?

      MS. PERINO: I think that -- well, one, I think that the President realizes that one of the -- you don't necessarily work with a government that way, with a sovereign government that way. The President has said he's not -- his patience isn't unlimited, and the American patience isn't unlimited. We've also -- as I've said, I mean, nobody wants peace and stability in Iraq more than the Iraqis. So they feel a lot of pressure on themselves in order to accomplish what is going to be very hard for any democracy. And it would be hard for this Congress to be able to pass those things through.

      It's very complicated. But I think that we have to look at this objectively. One of the things that they did do that they are being held accountable for, is they passed a bill in Iraq to spend $10 billion of their own money to start help rebuilding that country. And I think that that shows commitment on their part.

      Sorry for the length of these quotes, but I thought it was important to convey the unusual persistence of the WH Press Corpse.

      David Broder is journalism's Alberto Gonzales.

      by litigatormom on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:40:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I really wish (6+ / 0-)

    that when people ask these guys about the time required for the escalation to be 'given a chance' they use a metric of American dead, instead of the way-too-easy months, i.e. "Ok Senator, a CONSERVATIVE monthly average of American servicemen killed is 75/month.  So, is what you're saying is that we should wait until at least 450 more servicemen die before we decide what to do?"

    And yes I know that the actual monthly average is much higher.  The example was just to take into account the way a supporter would turn a higher number into a debate as to what the average really is.

    •  imagine the calculus (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      if one were to include all the dead.

      •  Oh I know (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        but, as you know, its only the American dead that count with the media(remember the weeklong Te Deum after 31 VT students as opposed to the 200+ Iraqis killed two days later).

        •  What are the real numbers? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I ran across this article this morning. They claim:

          Once it became evident that what had been expected to be a short, successful military campaign against Saddam Hussein had turned into a long drawn out and escalating guerilla war, the Department of Defense, acting on orders from the White House, began to reduce the daily public casualty list. Families and survivors of the dead were duly notified and the bodies were shipped back to the States for private burial but the numbers of the dead, and the wounded, were deliberately kept as low as possible for political reasons.  For internal use only, a realistic, and accurate, monthly report was issued for those concerned but it was not made public. When this private report was located by outside sources and sent around the Internet, the site was immediately shut down.

          This original listing showed that as of mid-2005, the death count in both Iraq and Afghanistan topped 10,000 with 20,000 seriously wounded.  By 2007, the death toll has risen to over 15,000 (and rising daily) with officially reported serious woundings (required out of theater hospitalization) at 50,508 as per a report published in the New York Times of January 30, 2007.

          Does anyone know of any verification or debunking of these allegations? It's the first time I've read them. It isn't the first time TBRNews has made them however. A couple of years ago, they wrote:

          U.S. Military Personnel who died in German hospitals or en route to German hospitals are not counted. They total about 6,210 as of 1 January, 2005.

          True or not, it is interesting.

          •  I did know about the 2nd blockquote... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            They are not counted as KIA.  

            -6.5, -7.59. I want to know who the men in the shadows are... ~Jackson Browne

            by DrWolfy on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:56:15 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Can we get some verification of this? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            If these numbers are anywhere near accurate, and the same ratio is holding true today, we are losing around FOUR times the number of soldiers in the Iraq war that the Pentagon is reporting. That's a major scandal and one that hits home to the American people.

            "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Jefferson

            by DanK Is Back on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 10:01:09 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  My Wingnut of the Day (5+ / 0-)

    Here we have a Neocon Harpie, Diane West, who says everything could've been great in Iraq if only we had the guts to bomb them back to the stone age from the beginning. I saw her on with Lou Dobbs and couldn't believe she was for real. Let the sunshine in on this warmongering nutcase!

    Livin' the Murkin Dream!

    by smartinez on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:47:06 AM PDT

  •  No consquences, no accountability, NOTHING (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, Cartoon Peril, moosely2006, foxfire

    That's Bush and the Repubs' plan:  just keeping throwing more bodies into the meat grinder, no matter what.  

    No one is ever held responsible.  The soldiers just have to be killed and maimed, and the Iraqis have to be slaughtered.   Hundreds of billions of American dollars in taxpayer money needs to keep being burnt.

    But by all means, let's not hold ANYONE accountable, or ever question the policy.  That would be the greatest horror, because it might make George W. Bush feel like less of a man.

    "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." -- Abraham Lincoln

    by chumley on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:47:46 AM PDT

  •  What the hell does that mean? (3+ / 0-)

    If there are consequences for failure to meet benchmarks,  the general's and ambassador's hands will be tied?  What does that mean?  That there should be no benchmarks?  That there can be benchmarks, but nothing happens if they're ignored (oopsie!).  So nothing can be done to hold the Iraqi government to their own commitments, much less the commitments that Bush has made on their behalf?

    If we can't hold the Iraqi government accountable, with consequences for not accomplishing anything we want accomplished, why not just leave?  What the hell are our troops, our generals, our ambassadors  doing there, Condi?!

    (-5.25, -7.95) "The only real questions are "Who's getting screwed" and "Who's doing the screwing?" - Molly Ivins (1944-2007)

    by SueDe on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:47:49 AM PDT

  •  Shafted (3+ / 0-)

    For four fucking years.

    End this piece of shit war.

    GI -- "I don’t know man, I thought about my family the whole time and coming back to them. If my wife leaves me and takes the kids I won’t give a sh.t about dyin in combat. I can’t think about that for too long, I know if she left and I didn’t have my kids to come back to I might just eat my rifle. God I know one guy who had his wife leave after the sh.t got heavy. He went in the sh.tter and blew his head off man. There have been lots of guys off themselves from what we heard. Might be a lot more of the guys if the sh.t don’t stop and we come home soon."

    "Man I am really done now, lets go get a beer and get wasted. F..k the war, fuck all those assholes in Washington!"

    CFTM -- "Sorry man, lets go have a beer and talk about football! No More War!"

    October 2003

    To announce...that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.

    by potownman on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:49:50 AM PDT

    •  I never saw combat (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mjd in florida

      but I served in the Army.

      This excerpt is chilling and exactly sums up what the helplessness that comes with being owned and operated by the government.

      Bush got us into this stupid, stupid war.

      Congress must get us out.

      Defund now and bring our boys home.

  •  If the Democrats cave after the veto and send (4+ / 0-)

    back a bill that has no timetables and/or no benchmarks, its all over but the stinging humiliation we will all feel.

    The republicans who are backing Bush in this are those who are appealing to the base to stay faithful and not allow a veto override.

    The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

    by nupstateny on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:50:43 AM PDT

  •  Wish I Could Remember Which (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, moosely2006

    Replican it was that whined, "Just let us try this."  Tacit admission that it could easily fail, at the cost of hundreds of American lives, but they wanted to give it a whirl anyway.

    I am so sick of these people.  

    Right the Wrongs...Gore in 08!

    by creeper on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:56:45 AM PDT

  •  Maliki student of Bush (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cartoon Peril, moosely2006

    Corruption, purges, stonewall.  Yeah, Maliki has good grasp on the GOP version of democracy.

  •  why is bushco helping al-kada? (4+ / 0-)

    they are emboldening the enemy, driving recruits to their doorstep, practically writing their PR campain for them. isn't this considered treason? not to mention, they are draining US blood, in their no plan offense.

  •  we dont need no stinkin 'comsequences' (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, Cartoon Peril, moosely2006

    perhaps if the republicans can have a bill that says that every time another 'benchmark' is missed or ignored the official spokesperson for the Iraqi Government must immediately run to the nearest microphone and say:  

    I take full responsibility for the failure to meet the Benchmarks.

    I think the GOP could get behind a bill like that...because, as we have unfortunately learned, THIS is what the loyal Bushies accept as 'consequences" for every failure....simply  taking responsibility (no punishment allowed)

    ...and it has worked quite well for them.


    by KnotIookin on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:11:44 AM PDT

  •  there is NO doubt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cartoon Peril, moosely2006

    bush is just extending this war to Jan 21, 2009 ti dump it on the next (allegedly democractic) president ---

    it is SO obvious he doesnt want to have the appearance of failure strung all over his neck like a hangman's noose --- and he ONLY way out is to pass the buck ---

    he will do ANYTHING to not succumb to surrender on his watch -- anything including lying, deceiving, shredding the constitution and having more and more American soldiers die for his "noble" cause

    it is SO obvious what his plan is --- and he has 30% lemmings, including Fat DIckfat Roger Ailes ready to pounce on the next president (especially if he/she is a democrat) for causing this failure

    i hope that every person enabling bush and this administration  --- that their dick falls off including condi's -- i hate them all

    He may talk like an idiot, and look like an idiot, but don't let that fool you: he really is an idiot...Groucho Marx

    by distributorcap on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:12:09 AM PDT

  •  Surge Subtraction (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Whenever the number of troops used in the "surge" is mentioned, there should be a correction subtraction for those killed (222) and those wounded (?).  We are probably approaching 500 - 1,000 in total by now.  That's a significant number already.

  •  But I thought Bush LIKED consequences (5+ / 0-)

    On the US Cole bombing:

    There must be a consequence

    On Saddam's WMD's:

    there’s going to be a consequence

    On Iranian "intransigence":

    there has to be a consequence

    On people who thumb their noses at the UN:

    there's got to be a consequence

    On political opponents who embolden al Qaeda:

    I have every right ... to make it clear what the consequences would be

    When you carry a gun to school?

    there ought to be a consequence

    When inner city schools fail?

    There has to be a consequence

    When someone "illegally" uses a gun in a commission of a crime?

    there ought to be a consequence

    If (candidate) Steve Forbes does to (candidate) Bush what he did to (candidate) Bob Dole?

    There is going to be a consequence

    When Sudan abuses Darfur?

    There has to be a consequence

    If the Taliban fails to surrender Osama bin Laden?

    there will be a consequence

    OK, that's one.

    Pass the word -- "No escalation without justification!"

    by RonK Seattle on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:23:15 AM PDT

  •  I thought the surge would work "because it has (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cartoon Peril, moosely2006

    to," in the immortal words of Our God-Emperor.

  •  Iraq will never have a functioning army... (4+ / 0-)

    As long as we are there.  Two things - first the McClatchy article that stated that America is giving up on training the Iraqi Army.  The second are the reports, both today and last week, of al-Maliki arresting Army leaders for their roll in cracking down on Shiite militias.  This is not a good recruiting tool - who is going to want to lead an army when it means doing your job can get you arrested?  This escalation, as many have stated here (I'm getting fucking sick to death of being right all of the time), has actually made a terrible situation even worse.  Everything Dubya touches turns to radio active toxic waste.

    Time Magazine - An 'Old Folks Home' for the discredited and irrelevant pundits and politicians.

    by RichM on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:26:54 AM PDT

  •   "Lost" war (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, Cartoon Peril, moosely2006

    If the discord and violence in Iraq could be resolved militarily, our fine men and women in the US armed forces would have resolved it months or even years ago, just as they did the 2003 "regime change" -- an actual military goal (albeit a misguided one).

    The situation can only be resolved, as Harry Reid said: economically, politically, diplomatically. To believe otherwise is to disparage our troops.

    Hey-ho, the DLC has got to go!

    by ebie on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:42:49 AM PDT

  •  Avoiding Accountability is the Modis Operendi (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cartoon Peril

    of the Bush Administration. What Rice is sugggestiong is totaly consistent with that logic.The only way to make them accountable is for the Congress to take the initiative and impeach.

    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" - Albert Einstein

    by koNko on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:44:35 AM PDT

  •   Will there even be a vote to overturn Veto ? (6+ / 0-)

    That is what I want to know. Will the Dems push this to the point of making everyone go on the record ? I believe we must hold that vote. If we don't the entire process will have been a sham and should be exposed as such.

    -8.63 -7.28 Molly "..We want to find solutions other than killing people. Not in our name, not with our money, not with our children's blood."

    by OneCrankyDom on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:45:10 AM PDT

  •  What I don't get is Maliki and Iran are Shiite (3+ / 0-)

    So on the one hand we are supporting the Shiite-led government in Iraq and on the other we are yelling about Shiite Iranian leadership "interfering" in Iraq. How stupid can you be to not see that is going to happen?

    Or, as Riverbend put it in talking about the Baghdad Wall,

    " will 'protect' A'adhamiya, a residential/mercantile area that the current Iraqi government and their death squads couldn't empty of Sunnis.

    So who exactly is on "our" side here?

    No one.

    And that's why we need to bring our troops home now.

    "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter." Dr. ML King, from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963.

    by bewert on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 07:51:38 AM PDT

    •  Amazing (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bewert, moosely2006

      With all the evidence out there, it's amazing that the American people haven't demanded an end to the Iraq war.  Or maybe it amazes me that they have demanded an end to the Iraq War, but nobody in power cares.  Definitely amazing our kids are still sitting ducks over there for no reason.  Shame on all of us.

    •  Truer words were never spoken... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bewert, moosely2006

      Again, and again, and again, and again.

      Our own soldiers don't know who "the enemy" is anymore.

      I think I heard someone say - "Who wins if we lose?"

      I don't know anymore...  No one is on our side anymore, there is no enemy, there is no mission.

      Can we please leave now?

      -6.5, -7.59. I want to know who the men in the shadows are... ~Jackson Browne

      by DrWolfy on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 08:04:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  JR is also upset at al Sadr (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      and the Mahdi Army for interfering in Iraq's internal affairs and al Sadr is about as Shi'a as it gets and is an anti-Khomeinist as well. On the other hand, if your head is a hammer, all you want to see are nails.

  •  Is it just me (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Is it just me or is the timing of this taker fire in California that managed to "melt" the bridge a little suspicious?  I mean, Rosie goes on TV and states the FACT that steel cannot be melted by fire.  Now conveniently an "accident" happens in a place where it's sure to get HUGE media coverage where just that happens.  I didn't happen in the middle of Kansas where it would have been 5th page news.  Instead it's San Fran where it's headline news.

    Just a thought.  I can't wait to see how this develops.

  •  And even worse... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    THIS is what those same Repubs mean when they say "support the troops". "No consequences"? You know, it's hard to imagine how Condi Rice got a PhD. We know for a fact she has no credibility, but how can she even get up there and say "no consequences" about a situation that's costing us lives daily--and the Iraqis hundreds more lives daily? No, there are ALWAYS consequences to a policy failure, especially one of this magnitude.

    One of those consequences was the changing of the guard in Congress in November. THAT consequence may not matter to the Administration, but it does matter to us; very much so. We will know longer accept their actions-without-responsibility m.o., and the sooner that dawns on them, the better--for all of us.

    I guess that's the essence of the difference between those of us in the "reality-based community" and those who steadfastly resist joining that community.

  •  The "Handcuffing the Generals" Talking Point (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    "Handcuffing the Generals" is still on the list of RNC-approved Bush White House talking points.

    To see which Iraq sound bites are on - and off - the list, see:
    "Mission Accomplished: 4 Years of GOP Iraq Talking Points."

  •  Thank you for. (0+ / 0-)

    "escalation" And not -You know.

    Looking for Good Reason

    by Clzwld on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 09:02:18 AM PDT

  •  someone tell GWB the only way to get out of a (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    hole is stop digging?  So far, all of our solutions have only made things worse.  The Iraqis have not forgotten the Crusader remarks. So now the solution is to build a wall?  It seems no matter how bad things get when we pull out, that they will not be as bad as they will be if we continue to stay.

  •  Bush keeps rolling loaded dice (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    hoping to come up with a winner. From the very beginning, we have managed to alienate the Iraqis who could have helped and formed allianaces with the crooks and opportunists. We have a loser in chief who has bet everything on other losers in Iraq. Rather than admit that he has been a complete moron, Bush prefers to sacrifice more lives on a strategy that depends on disingenuous and self-serving leadership in Iraq. While American troops attempt to put down the insurgency, they are being sandbagged by duplicitous Iraqi leaders and incompetence in Washington. We need to leave Iraq now. Things are not going to get better until Iraqis decide they want them to get better.

  •  kinda amazing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    This weekend on the McLaughlin Group the consensus was that the troops are stuck until Bush leaves office.  That's it.  No talk of victory or surge success or anything.  Just how the troops will get out given that Bush will not withdraw, no matter what the cost.  Who will get the blame?  

    "Cause in my empire life is sweet, Just ask any bum you meet. You may say I ain't free, It don't worry me." Nashville

    by lumpenprole on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 09:46:16 AM PDT

  •  iraq as population control? (0+ / 0-)

    there was some movie about a cigarette lobbyist wherein one comment the lobbyist makes in response to a reporter questioning why he represents tobacco companies, he replies, "Population control."

    i tivo'd that over and over and whoever the actor was just nailed the incredible cynicism in this statement. now i keep wondering why death pays and why we stay in iraq, why we dirty our planet, allow corruption to rule, gag, gag, gag.

    it is a logical answer, someone has to die as we invade, there is money to made, (if exxon doesn't make the money, the freakin' Chinese will!) "let us make it, WE're good, xtian, amurkins!  Jack is in jail, and i have to pay for my own football tix!"

    R's, in "good faith", try to remake the world to the R's satisfaction and we, the families of the "all-volunteer" service, get the honor of paying the price.

    need a light for that cigarette?

    •  not so much population control (0+ / 0-)

      as destabilization I think.  When you're the only military game in town (we spend as much as the rest of the world combined, sell the most weapons and have a hand in training the military forces of most nations), instability forces everyone to work with you.  The hole where Iraq used to be will cause problems some of our the defense industry's best customers for decades to come.

      "Cause in my empire life is sweet, Just ask any bum you meet. You may say I ain't free, It don't worry me." Nashville

      by lumpenprole on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 10:58:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Betrayal (0+ / 0-)

    Our world has since 9/11 become one of subterfuge and increasing fear. The Bush Administration clearly lied to the American public about the reasons for going to war. Since the declaration that weapons of mass destruction were located in Iraq, none have been found. A catastrophic waste of money, and the American people were betrayed. Fundamentally, we as a country, are a nation of rebels, fighting dearly for what matters most to us. But, in a war where there is no distinct enemy, we cannot battle in the same way. There is no military solution to a battle which must be waged on a humanitarian front. As Americans, we need a leader who will recognize that war is not the salve to put on the wound that was created when 3,000 Americans died in New York.  Poverty creates the terrorists and militants that continually emerge from the woodwork on a daily basis killing innocent people and our soldiers. In order to fight the war on terror, we need America to take off the war paint and put on our gloves. If we eliminate, through humanitarian efforts, the grounds for terrorism; our world can return be a safer place for all to live . The war needs to fought in a new way, and that we won't stand for losing another Iraqi's life or another brave American soldier. Not one more. End it now. There is another way to win.

  •  Consequences (0+ / 0-)

    Condi is a certifiable idiot. I guess they are still undergoing the "birth pangs" of democracy in Iraq too - 4 years later. This administration and its allies in and outside of government know that if this war is ended, their dealings will be fair game for investigation.

  •  Congress, repeat after me, (0+ / 0-)

    No Bush! NO, NO, NO!

    *a hundred years from now, the future may be different because I was important in the life of a child*

    by bonesy on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 03:34:16 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site