teach your government and people how to classify the right and wrong.you have no clear idea to the world. i thing you are toally zero in your mind

Saddam's atrocities were mainly during the 1980's. So America...you are 20 years too late to save the thousands that were killed by Saddam using YOUR chemical weapons,etc. If saving the Iraqis is an indication of America's great humanity why doesn't America express it more effectively in saving THOUSANDS now in Darfur,etc. The fact is..that America is not interested in saving people in Iraq or bringing democracy there, nor it is a failure when the mission is NOT for democracy or to save Iraqis. America has spent HUNDREDS of billions fighting a nation that had a GNP of 39 billion that was already destroyed by the REAL coalition of 1991. America could have BOUGHT Iraq. The true winners in this war are the people who made hundreds of millions in the name of "rebuilding" Iraq and fighting this "war on terror".

Florida and Texas beat New York on September 11 as Bush's American-style-freedom Pit still proves but Bush's handling of Saddam shows that Bush will always be America's Sore Loserman.

Have any of you personally been there to count the dead people? I know you leftist would much rather it be our US countrymen, but in war you do not get to pick and choose. I wish some of you would go over to Iraq and be body shields for the terrorists, so I would not have to read nonsense like this.

J Shaw wrote:
--We have won the Iraq war because 24-30 million people are free. Liberals never understand that.--

I absolutely agree that the US won the war, but why are we still there? That is what liberals don't understand.

Also, when rioters were tearing up the U.S. controlled city of Baghdad Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld responded by saying, "Stuff happens."

Rumsfeld described the looting of the city as an "untidy" display of freedom.

In response to questions about the first signs of chaos in the streets of Baghdad, the Secretary of Defense told Americans that they were seeing "a spontaneous outburst of the oppressed Iraqi people..."

Rumsfeld declared on live television that "free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes..."

So J, the Iraqis may be free but at the rate at which they are dying one has to wonder what that freedom means to them. Free to kill each other? Is it our job to stay to stop that form of freedom? Saying that we made the Iraqis free is a cop out and is an attempt to absolve us of the mess we made, and a mess we made under false pretenses. That is what conservatives do not understand.

They are always people like you, that lossing is a better story. We lost the Vetinam war even tho we never lost a battle. We have won the Iraq war because 24-30 million people are free. Liberals never understand that.

Congratlation on your freedom the G I's have fought for and won.

My thinking is as follows:
Winning is meaningless. Even if Bush got managed to accomplish his objectives: a country that can govern and defend itself (this was not the purpose in the first place) the enormous cost of this war will render such a meak result worthless. So whatever the outcome it will be a monumental loss.
As for a common sense strategy:
1-Concentrate U.S. forces into their barracks and let the Iraqis thrash out this war.
Since a controlled civil war is better than an uncontrolled one, just make sure that no outside forces interfere by patrolling the borders and warning Irak and Siria that any attempt by outside forces to break in will be met with force by attacking them inside their territory if need be.
2-Let whoever of the warring parties that gets the upper hand take power and let our forces leave as quickly as possible.
Carlos Martinez

I agree with the posts above that point out a sobering truth: No one is responsible for this immoral debacle more than the American electorate. American voters put Bush in office despite ample evidence of his incompetence, and allowed him to return after it was clear he had lied repeatedly about why he went to war. The French, the Germans, and just about everyone else with eyes in their heads around the world told us this was a huge blunder, and we ignored them.

It's time to pull out of Iraq and to promise ourselves to stop using our military instead of our heads in foreign affairs. Yes there will be great troubles for us thanks to this arrogant and stupid aggression, but such things happen to an arrogant and stupid people. Let's accept it and move on as best we can.

After seeing all these comments, I am aware of my voice-in-the-wilderness position; but...I would add to Arkin's article: in witnessing the actions of the United States I am reminded of the Maginot Line. The United States was incompetent in deciding to invade Iraq; it is incompetent in occupying Iraq; the American view of the world as expressed through its President's foreign policies is unbelievably ignorant and detached from reality. I make these harsh accusations as a Canadian who grieved over the assassination of President Kennedy, who loves your culture and music, who stood in silence in commemoration of the tragedy of 9/11, etc.; but, I am appalled at the disaster Americans are creating. I predicted the chaos in Iraq before the "Decider" dropped the first bomb and I predict now that the United States is in danger of losing everything because it persists in seeing the world through the lens of 9/11 or the lens of "the war on terror" or the lens of Christianity or the lens of American invincibility or superiority, or any lens but the lens of the real world. The American attitude is that if an American isn't suffering then no one is suffering. Still to this day Americans can't understand why "they" attacked "us"!

The Maginot Line to me means that, with Bush's policies, not only are the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan lost but so is the war on terror! The big guys and the pundits may chew over a "surge" or no surge of troops, or argue over "the way forward" or "strategies for success in Iraq"; but, these are debates over the deck chairs on the Titanic. The ship is sinking and the Maginot Line is no defence - so GET REAL: get out of Iraq, get Israel off your ass, get the neocons out of office, get rid of the ideologies and see the world as it is - otherwise, none of us survives!

One more thought: those so-called experts and authorities giving advice on what to do next - they are incompetent. If they weren't incompetent, Vietnam would not have happened, the Iraq invasion would have been avoided, the Iraq occupation would have been successful and bin Laden would be in jail!

"It seems that many are rejoicing at hearing that we are losing in Iraq. But many have been doing all they can to make sure that it happens.
The consequences of a loss will be disastrous and it may be that those who have been so negative will be the first to feel the bad effects."

No, Donald. You're not going to blame me when I was against this modern day Sicilian expedition. Some of us knew a week after 9/11 that the neocons were going to do everything they could to sidetrack us from going after al-Qaida and instead, have us screwing around in Iraq.

Yes, Donald, it was people like you that made this possible when you bellowed to give Bush a blank check in Oct, 2002. This detour caused by people such as yourself cost us strategic focus, the loss of goodwill around the world, and allies.

Donald, how does it feel to know, whether you wish to admit it or not that it is blind people such as yourself that are not only responsible for thousands of dead and wounded G.I.s, but also thousands of Iraqis as well whose only crime was to be in the rifle sights of the neocons and AIPAC?

Nice going.

"It seems that many are rejoicing at hearing that we are losing in Iraq. But many have been doing all they can to make sure that it happens.
The consequences of a loss will be disastrous and it may be that those who have been so negative will be the first to feel the bad effects."

No, Donald, I'm not.

Don't try to blame us who recognize a fool's errrand right after 9/11 when the neocons first brought up invading Iraq. I'm throwing that right back in your face. It was people like you who are responsible for the debacle when you bellowed for a blank check for Bush to screw with Iraq.

Yes, Donald, it was people like you that costs us strategic focus and allies in going after al-Qaida with your detour through Iraq.

How does it feel to know it is people like you who are responsible for the death and wounds of thousands of G.I.s, not to mention innocent Iraqis whose only crime was to be in the rifle sights of the neocons and AIPAC?

Nice going, champ.

"It seems that many are rejoicing at hearing that we are losing in Iraq. But many have been doing all they can to make sure that it happens.
The consequences of a loss will be disastrous and it may be that those who have been so negative will be the first to feel the bad effects."

No, Donald.

Don't try to blame us who recognize a fool's errrand right after 9/11 when the neocons first brought up invading Iraq. I'm throwing that right back in your face. It was people like you who are responsible for the debacle when you bellowed for a blank check for Bush to screw with Iraq.

Yes, Donald, it was people like you that costs us strategic focus and allies in going after al-Qaida with your detour through Iraq.

How does it feel to know it is people like you who are responsible for the death and wounds of thousands of G.I.s, not to mention innocent Iraqis whose only crime was to be in the rifle sights of the neocons and AIPAC?

Nice going, champ.

How will I know when we have won? What will victory look like, exactly?

The reason why we are still in Iraq is actually quite simple. The American people elected Bush to a second term despite the failure to find WMD and and the obvious disaster this adventure was turning out to be. We should blame ourselves if you have to blame anyone as he recieved a cleare mandate to continue what he was doing.

Instead of saying that "we've already failed", it seems to me that those who believe in the policy objectives of the United States should find some way of helping them succeed.

The opinion to which these comments are appended here seems, to me, another piece from what William Safire long ago called the "nattering nabobs of negativism".

Perhaps a more prosaic analysis, along the same lines, would be that if one believes that America's cause in the world today is worthy, than one will try to find positive solutions rather than offer only negative assessments of the situation at hand.

Pelosi's choice for chairman of the House "Intelligence" Committee in a CQ interview did not kow if Saudi Arabia, Al Queda or Iran were Sunni or Shiite! The US is at war with Islam because it cannot even define the enemy. Our military cannot speak the language or understand the culture. All it can do it kill people. Our military is incompetent, its leadership is corrupt. They have lost the War in Iraq and the War on Terror. They are now in extreme denial abou the disaster they have caused. All the generals can do now is sacrifice more troops and then retire. What a bunch of traitors.

Excuse me Mr. Donald Bales but you are talking rubbish sir. I know of no one anywhere in the country who is rejoicing over what is happening in Iraq. That sounds like Joe McCarthy talking about enemies under every bed to me. And as for feeling the bad effects, we are all already feeling the bad effects of the foolish actions of George W. Bush.

It might do you well to remember that we are on their soil, going into their homes with all of our menacing weapons, herding their people out of their homes, building bases in their country. Just how would you feel if some powerful foreign entity invaded your country, occupied your land, set up a government to their liking, established military bases here, brought on a civil war, destroyed most of our country's infrastructure and then blamed us for not supporting the governmnet they had set up?

You Bush suckups make me sick. The guy could take a dump in the Rose Garden and you would savor the bouquet.

It seems that many are rejoicing at hearing that we are losing in Iraq. But many have been doing all they can to make sure that it happens.
The consequences of a loss will be disastrous and it may be that those who have been so negative will be the first to feel the bad effects.

Why are we still there? Because, in large part, of the stupidity of the American people. We, after all, voted the moron-in-chief back to power. The oh-so-enlightened democrats of america decided that john kerry was the man to beat bush. If millions of democratic voters can't use the primaries to find a winner amoung the millions of democrats, and the republicans re-elect an obvious failure of a leader, why on earth do we blame bush, rummy, etc. for the failures of their policies. Blame yourself america - you let the war happen, and continue it's hapless, terrible way.

The "Long War" is reality and soon it will be known as the "Trillion Dollar" war ($500 Billion spent to date). Bin Laden stated his goal is to bankrupt the United States just as did to the Soviet Union and I submit he is succeeding. I am now resolved the going forward strategy for this Long War will require more troops somewhere, a long term commitment and thus more money, in addition to a new Iraq plan. I am beyond how we got to where we are today except to say there is no going back. Therefore, I suggest we must admit what we already know but do not talk about; we will be in Iraq for the next 15 years as evidenced by us still being in Korea 40 years later. Therefore, I am fully prepared to pay an import oil tax of 50 cents a gallon to start to pay for this "Long War". 50% of our oil comes from other countries. Simple math says this would raise gas prices by about 25 cents a gallon for all United States residents. There are 4 reasons to earmark this tax to pay for the "Long War"
1) To take a step in the right direction to stop our oil addiction by bring a greater sense of urgency to find alternative energy
2) To decrease our money going to those counties who hate us ( ie read: Middle East and other dictator countries we are supporting with our oil addiction
3) That we all feel the pain everytime we fill up our gas tank to motivate us to hold our leaders to accountable so not just the families that have given the ultimate, a loved one, to win this Long War
And most important to me:
3) So my great great grandchildren will not be stuck paying for my generation's war; right now we have sentenced my middle school aged daughter with our debt, I hope she understands, and I hope when she is 18 she is not drafted off to some desert country to bring democracy to people who are not ready for it.

I spent 22 months in Iraq as a civilian, implementing a women's development program - actually helping the Iraqi women get jobs, contracts and training.
We drug the Iraqis into this war and it is our responsibility to at least leave it as we found it. Our failures from the beginning - promising to rebuild the country, hiring third world country workers to come in and work, instead of hiring local Iraqis, firing the police and military - putting all those angry men out of work and susceptible to help from the insurgents from Iran/Syria. The insurgents believe that they can outlast us by continuously giving us a "bloody nose". I'm not minimizing the fact that our people are getting killed everyday, but the terrorists believe that we don't have the stomach for a long fight. They use Somalia and the Marine Corps barracks in Lebonon as prime examples.
It is our responsibility to clean up after ourselves - how, I don't know, but there are a lot of people in Washington getting paid a lot of money to come up with the right answers - not the politically right answers, but the right answers.
We have made life a lot worse for the Iraqis - despite that, they do not hate us. They are however, willing to accept the US leaving but they do not believe for a moment that their lives will get better.
It is easy for everyone to pontificate about sending or not sending more troops - but the fact is, we created our own mess - lack of leadership. Let's try for once to make the right decisions instead of the right political decisions.

We are still in Iraq because of the Bush/Cheney/Rice vision of imperial hegemony.

Immediately after the fall of Baghdad, the generals were well on their way to establishing Iraqi elections for Iraqis. That came to a screaming halt when Bush/Cheney/Rice fired Gen Jay Garner and replaced him with the fraudulent Paul Bremer.

With Bush/Cheney/Rice's guidance, Bremer then issued his first two edicts, both considered to be among the greatest blunders in U.S. foreign policy: 1. disband the Iraqi army, and 2. de-Baathitize Iraqi public offices. Bush/Cheney/Rice never, ever intended for Iraq to have free elections. They needed another puppet, and truly free elections would never give them that. We are still in Iraq because they still don't have the right puppet!

I understand King George the 43rd is an avid reader of history. My reading suggestion to him is

"The Charge of the Light Brigade"

Your problem Alex is that you are a crusader. You cite all of the horrors of the world and conclude that America--because it is the lone superpower--must use its power to rectify all of the world's evils.

The truth is that every time a superpower takes it upon itself to rectify all of the world's evils, it inevitably assumes that all of the rest of the world is just aching and eating its heart out to be like it. And in every past historical case of such imperial effort, the superpower attempting it--Rome, Britain, the Third Reich, the Soviet Union, and now America--has met the inevitable fate of decline.

The lesson I derive is far different from the one you seem to get Alex. And that is that the only people who can overcome the evils plaguing their respective nations, are the people of those nations themselves. America now finds itself in an unmistakable decline. How we manage that decline will determine if survive or if like other superpowers, fall into the bins of history.

Stew,

Many on this blog are listening and have already taken note of the similarities between the earlier fiasco in Vietnam, and the one that is currently taking place in Iraq.

I remember when Senator Kennedy attempted to warn Bush that he was creating his own Vietnam several years ago. But we all know that like Senator Kerry, former Vietnam-era veteran, he was also insulted, vilified and summarily dismissed.

Sadly many Americans decry the tactics that America uses to secure its promises to its citizens, while at the same time the same Americans crave after the benefits that result from America's more than occasional mischievious behaviors and tactics around the world.

So listening is one thing, however, learning is another; I am not so sure that the majority of Americans are willing to sacrifice unfettered consumerism in addition to all of the other advantages that come with being the world's number one hegemon nation!

In fact I see the latter, learning, as the biggest hurdle for America, and for its leaders to overcome.

Mr. Bush knows that in order for Americans to continue to garner/enjoy all of the abovem that it comes with a price, and too many times the price is the cost of injustice and the kind of nefarious activities that we witnessed previously in Vietnam, and now in Iraq.

If we would give up oil at the cost of $60 a barrel or less, some of the dynamics that affect our relationships with other countries in the world would change.

Until we cure this American form of schizophrenia, that it is okay to do evil in order to procure the apparent good, nothing will change!

Michael Jackson and company were wrong, America is not the world. And as long as Americans continue to believe that, America will have to continue to develop killer weapons, and to fight!

Stew,

Many on this blog are listening and have already taken note of the similarities between the earlier fiasco in Vietnam, and the one that is currently taking place in Iraq.

I remember when Senator Kennedy attempted to warn Bush that he was creating his own Vietnam several years ago. But we all know that like Senator Kerry, former Vietnam-era veteran, he was also insulted, vilified and summarily dismissed.

Sadly many Americans decry the tactics that America uses to secure its promises to its citizens; however, many Americans crave after the benefits that result from America's more than occasional mischief around the world.

So listening is one thing, however, learning is another; I am not so sure that the majority of Americans are willing to sacrifice unfettered consumerism in addition to all of the other advantages that come with being the world's number one hegemon nation!

In fact I see the latter, learning, as the biggest hurdle for America and its leaders to overcome.

Mr. Bush knows that in order for Americans to continue to all of the above that it comes with a cost, and too many times the cost is the cost of injustice, and the kind of nefarious activities that we witnessed in Vietnam, and currently in Iraq.

If we would give up oil at the cost of $60 a barrel or less, some of the dynamics that affect our relationships with other countries in the world would change.

Until we cure this American form of schizophrenia, that it is okay to do evil in order to procure the purported good, nothing will change!

Michael Jackson & Company were wrong: WE ARE NOT THE WORLD!

Its not so easy to say, I am a Viet Nam Veteran and and have something to say and feel like anyone would listen when this conflict consumes the daily news?
We told you so then when we came home and melted into the country and then erupted in PTSD episodes that made the evening news from time to time as others rolled their eyes saying another viet vet unhinges?
Weve been telling you so now in talks with family and friends, strangers too. And in so many of those discussions guys like me have been dismissed. Even the radio talk shows arent listening when they call us cut and run.
I never ran from anyhting then, we reitired tactically when the terms of engagenet dictated the tactics, one man at a time each of us in turn covering the exit and redloyment as the situation comanded to ensure survival.
This is the real order of battle to remain flexible, poised for attack and counter offense, to do that which cannot be done as a matter of routine, declare the obvious and do the opposite.
But hey, if you wont listen, why would I expect you to read?

For uncensored news please bookmark:

otherside123.blogspot.com
www.wsws.org
www.onlinejournal.com
www.takingaim.info

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1551.shtml

No money to treat 9/11 workers, $3 billion a week to fight Iraq?

By Jerry Mazza

Is this a new 9/11 conspiracy The New York Times is reporting? That "roughly $40 million that was set aside by the federal government to treat rescue workers, volunteers and firefighters who became ill after helping with the 9/11 cleanup and recovery will run out in months, physicians and federal officials said yesterday." And the fund goes broke while the war meter ticks in Iraq at nearly $3 billion a week?

On top of that, that sanctimonious Contra criminal, Robert Gates, sworn in Monday as defense secretary warns us that failure in Iraq would be a "calamity" that would haunt the United States for years. Well Bobby, we've got a "calamity" here in New York (still part of the United States) that has haunted us for five years and won't go away. So take your "commanders' assessments" "unvarnished and straight from the shoulder" and you know where to put 'em.

Members of Congress from New York and New Jersey had to fight to secure $75 million a year ago to pay for health expenses, which included $40 million for drugs and medical procedures, for some 32,000 workers who reported a variety of illnesses after working at Ground Zero. You remember GZ, don't you, where some special ops helpers blew up the Twin Trade Towers?

Yes? No? Well, remember this. The two major monitor/treatment programs, one run by Mount Sinai Medical Center, the other by the Fire Department, said at the present spending rate, treatment money runs out by spring or summer. They told us top federal health officials said that unless more money was forthcoming, they'd have to notify thousands of patents their treatment could end soon. What and just let them be sick or die?

This while you, Mr. Gates, call for a big surge of fresh flesh, blood and cash to feed the Iraq canons, while these 32,000 heroes languish unto death. Your federal officials tell us if all the workers who needed treatment got it, the bill would be $250 million a year; a bill we're told that "may meet with resistance from lawmakers in Washington, who are facing intense budget pressures." We've got some intense budget pressures right here. So get real, Mr. Gates. You want to play war, try the computer game: SOCOM3 USNavy Seals, it's a killer.

You want to be human and smart, get those US asses back to the masses. Save yourself the trip to Iraq and the taxpayer money. Adjust your "war strategy" to pay your war bills, first for the first responders. Don't wave the flag and make speeches like Bush, then turn your back on the wounded and dying. Use your position, make a decision, do something for them.

We've got your co-payment: $256.6 million right here. It includes "$163.6 million in direct medical expenses for 19,200: $91.2 million for 9,6000 patients with respiratory or digestive disorders, $58 million for 8,000 patients with 9/11 related mental illnesses and $14.4 million for 1,600 patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Medications account for more than half of the treatment cost."

The numbers are from The Times, Secretary Gates. I didn't make it up like Dick Cheney made up Weapons of Mass Destruction and their imminent use to get us into Iraq in the first place, or that Saddam sat on Osama's lap and hummed al Qaeda in his ear all night. Or like Miss Rice lied, she didn't want to see a mushroom cloud on the horizon. I have a feeling somebody there is ingesting mushrooms. Let me bring you back to reality, bro, and you, sister Condi.

We've got "$49.1 million a year in administrative costs, $6 million for translation services and an as-yet-undetermined figure for 'emerging issues' like complicated orthopedic diseases and disorders that may not become evident for many years, including certain lung and autoimmune diseases and cancers," you know like Gulf War syndrome, where ex-military good guys and girls, and/or members of their families or kids. drop like flies over the years.

I hope you don't think I'm talking apples and oranges here? Like it's two different things, 9/11 and Iraq? Uh huh! It's all about sick and dying Americans and making things better not worse. Unfortunately, the Fire Department or Mount Sinai Medical Center are not into drug or gun running or money-laundering like you and the boys were into in Nicaragua and with the Iranians, so we have to rely on our real government, not the shadow government, to pay up.

You need to give that "honest advice" to President Bush. And don't let him stonewall you with "we simply cannot afford to fail in the Middle East," because the US is failing miserably in New York, never mind the Middle East. And that is haunting our nation, right now. Like now, this minute, tomorrow.

Even Mrs. Clinton, the ex-first lady -- even Mrs. Clinton thinks what the federal government has done for Ground Zero fighters has been "too little too late." And she said, "I am not going to say where the money should come from, I'm merely saying that this should be a national priority. It is not just a New York priority." She's right.

And if the president is short on cash, maybe he could call a buddy at the Fed and have them pack the $250 million and ship it to his favorite bank, like they usually do when things get tight.

I suggest that because Dr. John O. Agwunobi, assistant secretary for health at the Department of Health and Human Services, and Dr. John Howard, the director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which prepared the estimate, are co-chairmen of a task force to examine 9/11 health issues. And they made no promises, no commitments about the funds coming to New York

Holly Babin, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services, wasn't even familiar with the estimate, duh. But she said they were looking at several approaches, options and models. I say cash is best, real money like the kind used to buy weapons, or pay for contractors in Iraq, or for soldiers' lives and limbs. That's what we need here in little old war torn New York, five years after the dastardly deed. Remember, Bob? Cash: $250 million.

What's more, the health folks have to move their bureaucratic butts, because this $250 million has to get into the president's budget. We can't sit on it while engaging in studies. Study this: those people are sick and some are going to die. Get one of these wart heads to put the item in the budget, and get a plan to get it sold, because we have felt the stakes in the "War on Terror." They were driven, like the Twin Towers, right through our hearts. But that's war, right Mr. Secretary? That's war.

The question is how sick are you and all the rest of the neocons that you want more and more of it? Remember Vietnam: 58,000 dead. And we went home with our tails between our legs, because it was a no-win, war from the Gulf of Tonkin non-incident. So don't let this war, contrived from the start, suck us into moral and financial bankruptcy. Speaking of that, our big city mayors and friends have been paying medical disability benefits with retirement money. And now there's a whole new hole that's growing.

In fact all over America, you would find cities with holes in them, in their budgets, their schools, their roads, their social services, their families who are going broke from exported jobs, old wars, the new war, and all hell turned loose on them. So be a hero. Tell the president to change his plan. Put America's pieces back together again. Heal the sick and dying from 9/11. Bring the soldiers home. And stop making that dumb speech, "Failure in Iraq will haunt the U.S." You and yours have been haunting us for 40 years. Enough is enough.
Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer living in New York City. Reach him at gvmaz@verizon.net.

Where is Osama Bin Laden?

Why did Building 7 collapse on 911? it was not hit by an airplane?

Where are the persons who send the letters with antrax to the US Congress?

Why are our boys and girls dying in Iraq?so that the defense contractors get rich?

For uncensored news please bookmark:

otherside123.blogspot.com
www.wsws.org
www.onlinejournal.com
www.takingaim.info

It's so simple, it's painful.
OK, so we don't have the troops, the proverbial "boots on the whatever".
But boy do we have FIREPOWER!!!
How 'bout them 2 billion dollar a copy attack subs?
Those Carrier Battle Groups?
B-1, B-2, F-117, the venerable B-52 still a great standoff platform, the F-22 now coming on-line.
Cruise Missles & Drones aplenty.
I can go on and on.
And we keep buying this hardware, never to be used, or so it seems.
But imagine a LEADER with the Testicular Fortitude to use this extraordinary power........wow!
We now stand naked before our enemies, who's numbers are legion, having revealed exactly the limits of our ground forces. Scary, huh?
But just think.........pick a couple of dozen or three fat ripe targets in say, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the Bekka, NK......the unusual suspects, dig?
Nothing fancy.......a palace here, a summer get-away there, the odd WMD facility, whatever you like.
Put the aforementioned weapons through the windows of the Palatial Royals (geez, it's 2007 & you schmucks still have Kings!) & on targets otherwise and then just deny we did it. Plausible deniability.
They'll all know who did it. And they will once again fear us.
We'll say it was probably one of those gas explosions.......happens here in Joisey all the time, y'know?
Shame that when Testicular Fortitude is needed, the most we can muster are girly men awash in Estrogen at the National Command.

Thanks you, Mr. Arkin for your insights. I particularly appreciate the use of the language of "success" and "failure" instead of "victory" and "defeat". The Bush-ist goal of "victory" in Iraq is, of course, undefined and unattainable. One would like to hope that some measure of "success" is still attainable in Iraq, but the facts indicate that this is not the case, and our efforts there so far are better characterized as a "failure" than as a "defeat".

A significant tragedy, and the absolute proof that the Iraq invasion was monumentally stupid, is the situation in Afghanistan. If it were possible to "stand up a democracy" (Cheney's words) and establish an ally in an Arab state, then it was incumbent on the administration to prove that they were up to the task in Afghanistan before starting on the Iraq project. They have proven the converse. Case Closed.

This has been over for awhile now; unfortunately, we've got a President who isn't listening.

Yes RT,

Mr. Bush is essentially doing now what he has been doing for over the past 8 years, thinking magically! We all know that the Republicans hated Bill Clinton so much so that they wanted to get someone, anyone, to run against the Bill Clinton legacy, qualified or not.

Arnold the pig, of Green Acres fame, was understandably unavailable, so someone thought, how about George Bush? Pigs are fairly intelligent you know!

So given that Bush had name recognition as a son of a former President, and he was the former governor of the State of Texas (amazing isn't it), and had ties to the evangelical community among other things, the Republicans convinced him that he could actually be President. Well, with people like Tom Delay in Texas, I can see how he was made governor of Texas after all.

I'm fairly certain that Mr. Bush knew that he wasn't qualified for the job. He must have chuckled when he was first approached. My God, this man could not explain why Jesus Christ was his hero. Well what does it matter, for he allowed himself to be drafted anyway?

Most of us would have demurred and said, no thanks, let's get the most qualified person for the job and run them instead, but not George Bush. And just as he apparently came to believe then, I can win; he is doing the same thing now with Iraq. And once again he is surrounded by a group of sycophants that are egging him on. My point, Mr. Bush has been out of touch with reality since that time, and he really believes that he is qualified to be the President of the United States in lieu of Mr. Clinton, a true scholar, and he believes that he can win!

But it's not all his fault, America contributed to this man's delusions of grandeur when we allowed him to become President. We will, Americans, have a lot to sit down and think about, and a lot of changes to make in consideration of future Presidents.

IF I WERE TO SET A HOUSE ON FIRE AND LATER CLAIM AFTER IT'S ALMOST COMPLETELY DESTROYED THAT ALLOWING THE HOUSE TO BURN TO THE GROUND WOULD BE A CALAMITY IS INSANE LOGIC AND EXTREMELY DELUSIONAL!!!

THIS GUY MUST REALLY THINK AMERICANS(AND PEOPLE OF THE WORLD) ARE REALLY STUPID!

BUT DON'T DESPAIR...THAT'S A GOOD SIGN! UNDERESTIMATION OF THE POPULOUS WILL HELP DESTROY THE NWO AND THEIR ILK!

The Rev wrote:
--Is there such a thing as Presidential Congressional Insecticide, something like RAID? Perhaps if we were to spray them with enough industrial strength truth, they would scamper or disappear!--

Just shine some light on them. You'll see them scamper like cockroaches. They only do their work in the dark so keep shining the light on what they do and they may get frustrated and go home on their own.

"My guess is that given years, and allowing for 700 American deaths and 10,000 serious injuries annually, the United States could turn things around. Get it? There is no timeline because there is no timeline."

That's asking an awful lot of guys to die or lose their limbs on the basis of a "guess."

This has been over for awhile now; unfortunately, we've got a President who isn't listening.

How do we end the war if Bush doesn't want to? Here are the options:

1) Congress, through legislation, demands an Iraq exit plan from DoD, then passes a DoD budget based on that exit plan.

Problem with this is that it doesn't actually require that Bush withdraw the troops.

2) Simulpeachment of Bush and Cheney. A tough sell, this early.

3) Congress could pass a new AUMF superseding the old one, that specified withdrawal by a date certain as the objective, and allowed for such use of force as was necessary for the troops' safety in the course of the withdrawal.

The problem is, Bush could and surely would veto it, and it would take 2/3 of each house of Congress to override.

I'd like to see the Dems try this anyway, just to put everyone in Congress on record as to where they stood on this issue.

"Will somebody tell this supposedly savvy Washington operator that the United States has already failed?"

C'mon, the man's not an idiot -- he already knows. But the guy who really needs to be told isn't listening. And so Gates, like the rest of official Washington, must go on pretending that there is still hope.

It's a GOOD life!

Sully asks: "Why we are still there is beyond me. We should have been coming home in late 2003. Bush's failure was ignoring his own belief that nation building was something the US should not be involved in. Bush WANTS to be in Iraq no matter what the state of conflict. That is the thing we should all be wondering about. Why has Bush left the troops there when the war ended 3 years ago? Why has the reason for the troops being there changed over and over again?"

Why indeed did we go in? And why, oh why, did we stay?
This is why we went in: Oil and graft immediately come to mind. Gratifying domestic champions of Likud as well as those religious right flock members with visions of Rapture dancing in their glassy eyes certainly played a part. But the clincher was politics. The slacker-in-chief's handlers had to pull a miracle after their Kennebunkport cowboy flashed a yellow streak while skedaddling to a Nebraska bunker on 9/11. They did. We all cut the pathetic phony some slack. The Bushies repaid us by using Iraq as a winning political ploy in 2002 and 2004.

And that's why we stayed: Georgie-Porgie just had to be a war president, don't you know. He had to play dress up on a carrier deck so people would forget his hero doll wet when you said "Vietnam." Good American men and women, approaching 3,000, have died; thousands more have been wounded, many maimed for life; and the ground combat arms are on the verge of breaking and have been set back to the sorry post-Vietnam state that it took decades to recover from, just so junior could pose as a leader. And what they have done to the Iraqis is unspeakable.

This administration is composed of malignant morons. They are not lacking in low cunning. What they do is politics. They are good at that. Governing? Heck of a job, Bushies.

But they are not your ordinary preening politician, shameless, truth-challenged, ego-driven, and greedy for love, money, and votes. They are a breed apart. They are monstrous in their selfish shamelessness. Ordinary politicians, even the most corrupt, generally act in the public interest at least once in a while. Ordinary politicians would draw the line at lying their way into an elective war primarily as a campaign stunt.

No, not ordinary. This nation will not redeem itself until they are rejected root and branch. Impeachment should be only the first step in their downfall.

Well, at least people are beginning to understand the problem. Recognizing the problem is the first step toward solving it. A beginning step would be the impeachment of George Bush and Cheney. Give Bush and Cheney two more years and they will dig a bigger hole for American Foreign Policy and more people will die.
The second step would be to pull our troops out of Iraq, and let the Iraqis settle their own problems.
The third step is to talk to Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Actually the Sunni countries need to talk to the Shia countries, so any conflict in Iraq doesn't get beyond that country's borders. It should be the business of American Foreign Policy in the Middle East to try to mitigate if not resolve disputes and not instigate them. I think Jim Baker and Jimmy Carter could do some good work if we turn them loose to negotiate without preconditions.
For those people worrying about Israel, that country will be buried under a cloud of conventional missiles if left to the machinations of Bush and Olmert. Israel needs peace to survive.

Sully asks: "Why we are still there is beyond me. We should have been coming home in late 2003. Bush's failure was ignoring his own belief that nation building was something the US should not be involved in. Bush WANTS to be in Iraq no matter what the state of conflict. That is the thing we should all be wondering about. Why has Bush left the troops there when the war ended 3 years ago? Why has the reason for the troops being there changed over and over again?"

Why indeed did we go in? And why, oh why, did we stay?
This is why we went in: Oil and graft immediately come to mind. Gratifying domestic champions of Likud as well as those religious right flock members with visions of Rapture dancing in their glassy eyes certainly played a part. But the clincher was politics. The slacker-in-chief's handlers had to pull a miracle after their Kennebunkport cowboy flashed a yellow streak while skedaddling to a Nebraska bunker on 9/11. They did. We all cut the pathetic phony some slack. The Bushies repaid us by using Iraq as a winning political ploy in 2002 and 2004.

And that's why we stayed: Georgie-Porgie just had to be a war president, don't you know. He had to play dress up on a carrier deck so people would forget his hero doll wet when you said "Vietnam." Good American men and women, approaching 3,000, have died; thousands more have been wounded, many maimed for life; and the ground combat arms are on the verge of breaking and have been set back to the sorry post-Vietnam state that it took decades to recover from, just so junior could pose as a leader. And what they have done to the Iraqis is unspeakable.

This administration is composed of malignant morons. They are not lacking in low cunning. What they do is politics. They are good at that. Governing? Heck of a job, Bushies.

But they are not your ordinary preening politician, shameless, truth-challenged, ego-driven, and greedy for love, money, and votes. They are a breed apart. They are monstrous in their selfish shamelessness. Ordinary politicians, even the most corrupt, generally act in the public interest at least once in a while. Ordinary politicians would draw the line at lying their way into an elective war primarily as a campaign stunt.

No, not ordinary. This nation will not redeem itself until they are rejected root and branch. Impeachment should be only the first step in their downfall.

Well, at least people are beginning to understand the problem. Recognizing the problem is the first step toward solving it. A beginning step would be the impeachment of George Bush and Cheney. Give Bush and Cheney two more years and they will dig a bigger hole for American Foreign Policy and more people will die.
The second step would be to pull our troops out of Iraq, and let the Iraqis settle their own problems.
The third step is to talk to Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Actually the Sunni countries need to talk to the Shia countries, so any conflict in Iraq doesn't get beyond that country's borders. It should be the business of American Foreign Policy in the Middle East to try to mitigate if not resolve disputes and not instigate them. I think Jim Baker and Jimmy Carter could do some good work if we turn them loose to negotiate without preconditions.
For those people worrying about Israel, that country will be buried under a cloud of conventional missiles if left to the machinations of Bush and Olmert. Israel needs peace to survive.

Sure is late in the day to talk about helping people when the consensus is it is worse than it ever was in Iraq. Assume we send 100.000 troops and stabilize Baghdad and the central region. What happens next, do the south or north want to re-unite or are they happy with the situation of being relatavely homogenous, separate and independent? Is there a govermnet structure outside of the green zone that would promote a unified country and provide effective service to a skeptical nation? Sometimes things get so broken that they cannot be put together again. It seems to be long past the time when we can pretend that if we do away with those darn insurgents in the central area the democratic country of Iraq will rise from the ashes. So what then, do we remain as sutures holding together the Frankenstein monster that Iraq has become? We'll need to become more ruthless than Saddam.

Why we are still there is beyond me. We should have been coming home in late 2003.

Sully,

Although I am certain that the nature of your question is rhetorical, I feel that we are still in Iraq because a complicitous Congress failed to do its job, and stead became an accessory to murder after and during the fact.

Without even getting into the issues of Presidential fraud and misrepresentation, the minute that Congress was made aware that there weren't any WMDs in Iraq and
that they had been misled, the Congress should have stepped up and stopped funding the illegal American invasion and destruction of another sovereign nation in the world. Why didn't they act?

Many of our Congressional Representatives who were forced to leave Congress over the past couple of years should have been forced out, and not just the insecticidal gerrymandering pseudo-Christian Congressman from Texas or whatever state he claims to be his home,

By the way I was in a meeting with those Texas State Representatives who fled Texas in order to prevent Tom from helping to gerrymander that state in favor of the Republican Reich some years ago. Delay or Haggard, which of the new political Christians would you prefer? These folks give Christianity and religion a bad name!

Now we have to figure out how to get rid of the rest along with Mr. Bush. Is there such a thing as Presidential Congressional Insecticide, something like RAID? Perhaps if we were to spray them with enough industrial strength truth, they would scamper or disappear!

Good thing we stayed out of places like Dafur and never messed with the Khmer Rouge or for that fact, lets leave NK alone. Sure millions die every year, but it sure beats the heck out of us getting hurt

Alex,

You finally said something that you and I both agree upon, instead, we should allow those legitimate organizations who do not have a hidden agenda to help resolve the problems in Darfur and the DPRK.

Frankly, I had been concerned that the U.S.A. would strategically enter into the Somalia fray in hopes of counterings its imperialists image in Iraq.

If America were to go to Iraq, they would go there only in the interest of America. Make no mistake about altruism for when the first American soldier would be killed, then the war would have just begun.

Why haven't we sent advisors to that region yet? Because most American advisors are military advisors? America declares war on everything; we don't have a Peace Department. The State Department is concerned about America too.

If America was to go in the number of deaths would be tripled. America cannot resolve the problem in Iraq that it created, how could it help the people in Darfur.

Besides the wsstern nations are in part responsible for much of the damage the problems that we see in African states today.

And on the other hand the western nations are mostly responsible for those nations on the Africa that have succeedeed.

What does that suggest to you? And why aren't you in the military somewhere killing people, you seem to have that kind of bent?

On the contrary we succeeded and in a matter of weeks. Saddam was removed. If WMD had been there, our stated reason for invading, then it would have been captured and removed. In any event, our goals were met, shortsighted as they were. The threat of WMD being handed to terrorists by Saddam is no longer a threat (of course we now know it never was). But forget all the failings of intelligence, we won this war, our mission was accomplished as Bush stated on the USS Lincoln, and its long been time to go home, our mission accomplished, the threat removed.

Why we are still there is beyond me. We should have been coming home in late 2003. Bush's failure was ignoring his own belief that nation building was something the US should not be involved in. Bush WANTS to be in Iraq no matter what the state of conflict. That is the thing we should all be wondering about. Why has Bush left the troops there when the war ended 3 years ago? Why has the reason for the troops being there changed over and over again? We ask for the definition of "completing the mission" but Bush never tells us what it is but says we need to stay there until the mission is complete. And we all just accept it and try to figure out how to do it, whatever "it" is!

An interview with an Iraqi woman a few weeks ago made so much sense I've given up on our administration and its ability to think. She said that infighting between Iraqi factions has gone on for centuries but they always come to an agreement over time. She suggested putting US troops on the borders to keep out the foreign elements that are pouring into Iraq and letting the Iraqi factions have their little civil war. Eventually she said after a year or two Iraqis will come to agreements and set up a government that works for them. Bush was right, we are not very good at nation building. Maybe she's right and its time for Americans to defend Iraq against the foreign influx and simply let the Iraqis kill each other until they can't stand it anymore and make peace. Can anyone explain why this is not being considered? I would think Rummy would have thought a civil war just a way of expressing their new-found freedom, like looting.

Bush's supporters don't think the war is winnable either, but they keep sending our troops to die, just to protect Bush's ego. How do I know they don't believe in the war? It's very simple...

If even 1% of Bush's supporters would enlist, there would be plenty of troops, but they all have "other priorities" so we have a shortage of troops. Those who are physically unable to serve could help pay for the war, but... they don't. If Bush's base would agree to an increase in taxes of only 1-2%, the war would be paid for without stealing the money from our kids. But no, that's too much to ask. Let the kids pay for it... again.

These hypocrites tell us this war is essential to our national survival, but they refuse to pay for it in blood or money. Bush's own followers don't believe it's worth fighting, so why should we?

Failed yes....

...but we have also succeedeed in showing the world the ruthlessness of America, and America's true intentions and designs on the world.

What the world is witnessing now is contrary to a few decades ago when the United States had the world convinced that it was the Soviet Union that was to be feared. But what nation, have many other nations in the world expressed concern about lately? Well, it isn't Russia, China, Iraq, North Korea or Iran.

Several years ago Bush and his administration constantly criticized President Putin of Russia and accused him of centralizing power in Russia and the region around Russia. Was it true or not?

It doesn't matter, because Bush had been doing the same thing around the world and in America; thus Putin I am sure felt purely justified in terms of whatever he was doing that was far less than what George was doing. Thank God George was finally rebuffed by the American courts, although it does not appear that his evil ambitions have been doused.

What is the current policy objective for the Bush mission to Iraq? The current objective is to salvage a win? I will concede this, Bush knows that he has made a terrible mess in shifting the balance of power in the Middle-East in favor of those nations in the Middle-East that America hates.

Ergo he and his boyz have also discussed attacking those nations in the Middle-East that Bush has inadvertently given power to, Iran and Syria in particular.

Give him credit for trying to clean up his mess in the only way that he knows how, killing people and their loved ones. However, killing more innocent people will not fix the problem.

There is another solution however, but it will require new and honest leadership to help us to get there!

Bush reminds of the killer who tried to hide the evidence after he had committed the act of murder. Why not just admit that you did it Mr. Bush, because sooner or later you will will receive your comeuppance!

To Alex: No, the lesson to be learned is to LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP AND TAKE THE REST OF US WITH YOU. You and the rest of the 30% who are still sucking Bush off just go back to sleep and let the adults handle things, okay?

For uncensored news please bookmark:

otherside123.blogspot.com
www.wsws.org
www.onlinejournal.com
www.takingaim.info

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1547.shtml

Geopolitical lumps of coal for the world

By Larry Chin

As 2006 draws to a close, the world faces new dangers from a collapsing and desperate Bush-Cheney administration gathering itself for its final two years of world destruction.

Middle East powder keg set to blow

The Bush administration is pushing for a major US troop build-up in Iraq, possibly involving up to 50,000 more troops, and gearing up for intensified pacification campaigns aimed at suspected "insurgencies" and "sectarian violence", the two perennial catch phrases used by Western media to characterize massive national resistance to the US occupation. The continued destruction of Iraq, and recent upheavals in Lebanon, Syria and Iran are steps toward a complete territorial and resource conquest of the Middle East, which will be carried out even after Bush-Cheney is gone.

Bush-Cheney is expected to flatly reject the political damage control measures recommended by the Iraq Study Group (ISG), and worsen the holocaust, even as the region sinks deeper into chaos, on the nuclear brink.

It is no surprise that the Bush administration's refreshed zeal to "stay the course" and escalate mass murder operations comes following Saudi Arabia's threat to intervene in Iraq, and deals personally agreed to with Dick Cheney on his recent trip to Saudi Arabia. The sudden resignation of Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Turki (former head of Saudi intelligence) was a related development. The petro-elites are circling the wagons. Perhaps there is a reason why James Baker and other members of the ISG have fallen silent.

Adding to the conundrum, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and other US puppets have rejected the ISG plan, despite continuing to lobby for some sort of US troop withdrawal schedule, while Prime Minister Al-Maliki, surrounded by US-trained security teams, increasingly fears for his own life.

The world consensus will not come about on Bush-Cheney-Rice's murderous watch -- or at least not without a fight to the death. Left to the insane Bush, the self-destructing American Empire will be denied the political face that the ISG was intended to restore. It is so bad that archconservative Patrick Buchanan is sounding the alarm, and issuing on-target criticisms. (See Buchanan on the elite "US war over the war".)

Iraq a literal hell

Meanwhile, Iraq has been reduced to a literal hell of daily death, atrocities, disease, lawlessness and exploitation. The nightmarish on the ground realities reported by Dahr Jamail and the Angry Arab News Service continue to be covered up by the Bush administration and the corporate media.

Espionage or coincidence?

There is strong circumstantial evidence that the Litvenenko poisoning in the UK, and the assassination of Lebanon's Gemayel appear to be connected to Anglo-American covert operations, carried out according to US policy.

Meanwhile back in Washington, the sudden collapse and brain affliction suffered by US Senator Tim Johnson throws Democratic Party plans for congressional dominance and sweeping Democratic influence into doubt. In a spectacular coincidence, Johnson's collapse revives hopes that the Republicans might retake the US Senate, and block all attempts to slow or stop Bush-Cheney's war, or expose the administration's past crimes.

Karl Rove could not have planned a dirty trick any better.

AIG grabs Dubai Ports World

In a major story noticeably missing from mainstream corporate headlines, Dubai Ports World (DPW) has been acquired by American International Group (AIG). Recall that DPW was the focus of a loud outcry across the nation, and the scandal over US port security.

Now US ports are controlled by a worldwide conglomerate that is rooted to narco-trafficking, intelligence, money laundering, war profiteering, and terrorism (also see here). AIG is the former bastion of scandalized super-elite Maurice "Hank" Greenberg.

Where is the outcry, now that the house of Hank Greenberg controls the ports? Where is the outcry, as government-connected elite interests increasingly seize control of the US energy infrastructure?

US ties to narco-regimes exposed

The mainstream Western press has only now begun to report the non-news that Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and his administration are tied to narco-trafficking right-wing paramilitary death squads listed by Washington as terrorist organization.

Uribe's ties to the CIA, narco-trafficking, paramilitaries and the US government are an exhaustively documented fact, reported by Narco News for many years. In Drugs, Oil and War, Peter Dale Scott notes that Uribe is a "product and an exponent of the paramilitary counterrevolutionary system the United States helped install in Colombia." (Nice to see that it still takes up to ten years for mainstream coverage to catch up on such stories.)

This bad news for the Bush administration (Uribe's greatest ally) comes in the wake of a mushrooming scandal that has included evidence of vote fraud in 2002 (the election that installed Uribe), assassinations, and the forced expulsion of five Colombian congressional candidates.

At the same time, in Afghanistan, the poppy crop hits an all-time high, and the Taliban surges back to prominence, under US occupation.

A planetary crisis

The concepts of global warming and gas supply crisis have begun leaking into the mass popular consciousness, thanks to softball presentations such as Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth. Yet, there still remains relatively little urgent mobilization or a peaceful, rational policy to deal with the elephant in the living room that is Peak Oil and Gas.

According to geologist Kenneth Deffeyes, author of Beyond Oil: The View from Beyond Hubbert's Peak, the world oil peak occurred on Thanksgiving 2005.

Now, just over one year into post-Peak, new reports from the scientific community warn that the Artic may melt by 2040, Antarctica is also melting suddenly, and a small nuclear war could cause permanent catastrophic damage to the planet.
The world may well face all of these nightmares well before 2040, and with the likes of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney at the controls.

The lesson from all this is , you dont want to ever try to help those who need help unless its dropping supplies and talking.
Good thing we stayed out of places like Dafur and never messed with the Khmer Rouge or for that fact, lets leave NK alone. Sure millions die every year, but it sure beats the heck out of us getting hurt. Great lesson if yr a shake yr head and a " gee thats too bad but we cant do anything..." type of person. Next time someone is getting the pulp beaten out of them, make sure you stand by and watch, but dont break a sweat trying to do anything.

To Mr. Odis Kenton: I wish I'd saved my breath. Bravo.

You can't win what was already lost when it was conceived. It's an impossibility.

Turn what around? It is what it is and Americans, who have never had a course in anthropology or taken a non-western history course or learned a non-western language, will never understand that. Embedding is an especially hilarious notion. Talk about square peg and round hole! Hey, in America, Sinclair Lewis' MAIN STREET lives . . . and it never occurs that it is anything other than normal reality. Americans: Provincials from the giant North American island. They think they get it, they do not and they do not know what that means. So it goes. Get out, please.