This is fascinating-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020901917. html

Retired General Odom points out some myths that have been cultivated about the Iraqi occupation. Here is the first:

"1) *We must continue the war to prevent the terrible aftermath that will occur if our forces are withdrawn soon.*

Reflect on the double-think of this formulation. We are now fighting to prevent what our invasion made inevitable! Undoubtedly we will leave a mess -- the mess we created, which has become worse each year we have remained. Lawmakers gravely proclaim their opposition to the war, but in the next breath express fear that quitting it will leave a blood bath, a civil war, a terrorist haven, a "failed state," or some other horror. But this "aftermath" is already upon us; a prolonged U.S. occupation cannot prevent what already exists."

Yes, he's right - to an extent. Limiting yourself to the options "Stay and handle Iraq exactly the same way [maybe with a few more troops]" or "Get out and let the chips fall where they may," the former isn't going to work with more time - it's just going to get worse with more time.

Unfortunately the Bush Administration and many others aren't considering any other options. The most common sense approach of course is getting Iraq's neighbors involved. If there's a problem in your neighborhood, who should handle it? People on the other side of town? Or the people who LIVE in the neighborhood?

The Iraq Study Group recommended engaging with Syria and Iran. Beyond that, any solution to Iraq now should try to include all of Iraq's neighbors, since they have a vested interest in a peaceful Iraq. Continued chaos in Iraq could spill over their borders.

I've said before: the Bush Administration has limited us to a "US Go-it-alone" solution. It's not just because no other country wants to get involved; it's because the US has spent billions building military bases in Iraq and intends to have a presence there for a long time. US companies (and some British companies) are expected to get the benefits of rebuilding Iraq and of having access to their oil. We don't want to share them. When you are married to this approach as the Bush Admin. is, then no other strategy other than "US Go-it-alone" makes sense. You don't want the Turks and the Syrians sending peacekeeping troops in there, you don't want their countries reaping the benefits of a permanent US presence in Iraq. That's the big reason Bush won't consider pulling out.

We have to give up this "US Go-it-alone" mentality before we can hope to have any real solution to Iraq, before we can consider anything as radical as partitioning the country for example. That's just not going to happen before January 20, 2009.

Andrew

Eh. Give it another 6 months. Everything will be fine.

Yeah.

I almost get the feeling the hard core 20 percenters would just love a big ass war to teach the rest of us some kind of morbid lesson. The promise of vindication, instead of having to face the spectre of acceptance will drive them home until the bitter end.

Lemmings.

Right.

Just like the hard core leftists have been rooting for us to lose to teach the rest of us some kind of morbid lesson. The hatred of Mr. Bush, instead of terrorists, will drive them home until the bitter end.

Lemmings.

Herb

Describe "losing". Doesn't it look pretty much like what is happening now?

The situation in Iraq reminds me of the story of the guy in the swamp holding the crocodile's mouth shut. The longer he stays there the more crocodiles gather (but help may arrive); yet letting go of the croc he's holding onto has it's own set of dangers. Should he wait awhile or let go now?

Herb, that would pack some punch, but your guys don't have the high ground, now do they?

Breaking the law, excessive executive power, corruption, starting an unjust war, exploiting 9/11...

That all kind of takes the air out of it.

"Just like the hard core leftists have been rooting for us to lose"

I'd love to see an OUNCE of backup for that utterly false and bullshit statement, but I'd also love to have 5 million dollars and a tax-free new house fall into my lap.

Totally.

All anyone has asked is that others support their views and actions.

The majority of the Residents administations actions are not defensible. They are backed with lies, manupulations, smears, distractions, you name it.

Oh, we can always toss corruption in the mix for a little extra spice too.

Then there is the worrysome idea that the GOP would not be in a losing position had they actually worked at making sure their actions were defensible, not plausabily deniable.

Nobody wants them to lose Herb. When that happens, it costs all of us a lot. To date, we've got a lot of dead bodies, growing numbers of people in poverty, stagnant wage growth, half a trillion essentially wasted dollars and a trashed world reputation.

Defensible Herb, that's all anyone can ask.

The GOP is not delivering on this.

You, in general, are not delivering on this.

KSKD sez: "That all kind of takes the air out of it"

Or to state it bluntly, Bush farted.

"During their first tours, most may well have favored "staying the course" -- whatever that meant to them -- but now in their second, third and fourth tours, many are changing their minds. We see evidence of that in the many news stories about unhappy troops being sent back to Iraq. Veterans groups are beginning to make public the case for bringing them home. Soldiers and officers in Iraq are speaking out critically to reporters on the ground.

But the strangest aspect of this rationale for continuing the war is the implication that the troops are somehow responsible for deciding to continue the president's course. That political and moral responsibility belongs to the president, not the troops. Did not President Harry S. Truman make it clear that "the buck stops" in the Oval Office?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020901917_2.html

This particular passage from General Odom's article struck me as a symptom of a longer term problem. These men are battle weary, being sent back and being told that they will go to prison if they do not tow the line. Is this administration prepared for the responsibility and consequences of a military with diminishing morale? What happens when they do come home to stay?

"In 1776 the Continental Congress sought to encourage enlistments and curtail desertions with the nation's first pension law. It granted half pay for life in cases of loss of limb or other serious disability. But because the Continental Congress did not have the authority or the money to make pension payments, the actual payments were left to the individual states. This obligation was carried out in varying degrees by different states. At most, only 3,000 Revolutionary War veterans ever drew any pension."
http://www1.va.gov/opa/feature/history/history1.asp

Screwing our strongest and bravest is an old and time honored tradition. Even our own government admits that the men who freed us from the British were tossed aside.

"President Bush has had a chance to rectify this, and he hasn't done it," said Ronald F. Conley, national commander of the American Legion. "Before we spend one dime rebuilding Afghanistan and rebuilding Iraq after we bomb it to smithereens, we ought to take care of our veterans."
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1222-01.htm

You know when that was said? In 2002, after the first months of this folly. Exit strategy or not, win or lose, we are not prepared to take care of our Veterans. Behind all the fluttering flags, cheerleading and jingoism, this administration has slashed and burned at the VA and left our soldiers in the cold.

"An estimated 500,000 veterans were homeless at some time during 2004."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0208/p02s01-ussc.html

Half a million people. Let that sink in rally monkeys. Iraq could be a shining jewel with peace that rivals a sleeping kitten, but if our fighting forces come back to a shopping cart and overpass home, we have lost.

An overwhelming majority of our current homeless are due to the wars of the past century. Curious? Ask any homeless man about his life. Thank him for his service, shake his hand and buy him dinner. You'll learn a great deal from the conversation.