IRAQ - IRAN, IRAN - IRAQ
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?
THEY BOTH HAVE OIL!!!
March 20, 2003 we invaded Iraq. Baghdad "bagged" in 3 days, more or less. Close to 4,000 U.S. soldiers dead. God knows how many Iraqis killed since then - estimates are close to 200,000.
Now after all that, we have to face the Bush War Machine and still another "Pep-Talk" about the absolutely urgent need to "Surge-On". Never mind the Maliki government has all but disappeared [Sunnis officially have resigned in all meaningful capacity] asBush met privately at the Pentagon on Friday with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary Robert Gates with the intent of deciding how to proceed forward on Iraq.
"Petraeus did not participate in Friday's session,but one senior U.S. official said the general, along with Ryan Crocker, U.S. ambassador to Iraq, probably would tell Bush and Congress in mid-September that the buildup had succeeded in making slow but sure progress on both the military and political fronts."
Chief of Staff of the Army. They have both weighed in on the undue strain being placed upon the Army from the 15-month tour of duties and the all too short 12 months leave before the next reassignment back to Iraq. In effect, they have argued that the Army simply cannot sustain such a level of troop deployment.
Now enter the White House and "All Bets Are Off". Brings to mind that popular movie a short time ago - "Sideways." That's the only way to characterize the Bush Administration - whenever they are confronted with reality or attacked head-on --- they just go "Sideways." Disassemble is a better way to put it but the effect is the same. Truth/Reality get squashed and propaganda rules the day.
To refer to another blog source on this point ---
Despite the common belief (and statements to that effect) that the September report on the progress of the "surge" in Iraq would be written by Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ryan Crocker (U.S. Ambassador to Iraq), the report will actually be written by the White House, with input from various agencies. This was reported today in the Los Angeles Times, but it was buried deep within a story on the expected content of the report itself. In fact, it was nearly at the end of the story, rather than being front-and-center where it should be.And finally, on the Keith Olbermann evening news show [Count Down-MSNBC] he asked MSNBC analyst General Wesley Clark his thoughts on the White House downplaying the meaningfulness of the Iraq benchmarks - benchmarks that Bush himself chose way back in May as a yardstick to measure U.S. progress in Iraq:
"Does that not make it difficult for the White House to argue now that this GAO report will not present a true picture of the situation in Iraq?" Olbermann asked MSNBC analyst General Wesley Clark "Exactly right," replied Clark. "They should not be able to squirm out from underneath these standards. ... The American people are making a judgment every day as they see the results of the war. The benchmarks confirm that judgment, and this is a huge problem for the White House."
Well, by now, I think the reader is starting to get the picture. As the Bush Administration would put it - "don't confuse me with the facts, please!"Come September 15 and the official Iraq Report [date now cited as September 11 or 12] - the "die is cast". No matter what the final official assessment --- or no matter which direction this administration will proceed on [withdrawal or "surge-on"] - INERTIA has set in. The end is already a foregone conclusion. The laws of Physics rule from here on in. The U.S. Army is Dog-Tired. They are War-Weary. They're not gonna be doing anything appreciably better --- their time in Iraq has come and gone. It is now up to a Political Settlement [LIKE THEY DID - FINALLY - IN IRELAND] - aka - "THE GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT"].
1 comment:
Well done, old chap! A brief, yet concise update of how Bush is cleaning up his mess with his soiled undergarments. Big T
Post a Comment