Reality finally sinking in - Iraq expectations lowered

[World Eater]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8942482/

About fucking time these morons in charge woke the fuck up. Pretty sad that this turned out exactly how many of us predicted, worse off then if we had stayed out. Looks like the new line (which I've seen coming for over a year) will be that we'll hand over Iraq, and when it blows up to shit we'll blame the Iraqis for their inability to control the place. I'm sure the revisionists will also forget the reality of things when we handed the country over, instead painting a rosy picture of how the country was "perfect" (and the idiots will believe them too!) when we gave it to the Iraqis. I can hear it now, "we went in freed them from the tyranny of SH and rebuilt their country, we did all we could have". All this said while Bagdad burns.

We should have never touched that fucking place.

[Biggirl]

Does anyone else have Mad TV's video dating skit music in their heads? Lowered Expectaaationssss

I wondering if it took the administration this long to realize their stupidity or this long to admit to their stupidity.

[yojimbo]

If things go the way the seem to nowadays, you'll see all the usual crew, O'Reilly, Hannity etc. proclaim this as just another commonsense move on behalf of the fuckers who fucked up so badly in the first place*


*I don't think they fucked up at all BTW. They got what the wanted IMO. They sent there message and made lots of money for a lot of their "base" in the process. The lives of average Americans lost fighting and the lives of Iraqis means nothing to these cunts.

[World Eater]

*I don't think they fucked up at all BTW. They got what the wanted IMO. They sent there message and made lots of money for a lot of their "base" in the process. The lives of average Americans lost fighting and the lives of Iraqis means nothing to these cunts.

I agree, I'm saying they fucked up from a historical POV. Fall of the republic and all that shit...

[NurseCarmen]

Bush: ‘We're helping Iraqis succeed’I suspect he means the insurgents.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Some choice bits from the article:
"We set out to establish a democracy, but we're slowly realizing we will have some form of Islamic republic," said another U.S. official familiar with policymaking from the beginning, who like some others interviewed would speak candidly only on the condition of anonymity. "That process is being repeated all over."
Washington now does not expect to fully defeat the insurgency before departing
The United States had high hopes of quick, big-budget fixes on electricity that would show Iraqis tangible benefits from the ouster of Hussein. But inadequate training for Iraqi staff, regional rivalries restricting the power flow to Baghdad, inadequate fuel for electrical generators and attacks on the infrastructure have contributed to the worst summer of electrical shortages in the capital.

Water is also a "tough, tough" situation in a desert country, said a U.S. official in Baghdad familiar with reconstruction issues. Pumping stations depend on electricity, and engineers now say the system has hundreds of thousands of leaks.

"The most thoroughly dashed expectation was the ability to build a robust self-sustaining economy. We're nowhere near that. State industries, electricity are all below what they were before we got there," said Wayne White, former head of the State Department's Iraq intelligence team who is now at the Middle East Institute. "The administration says Saddam ran down the country. But most damage was from looting [after the invasion], which took down state industries, large private manufacturing, the national electric" system.

Amazing, Washington is now admitting that Iraq will not be a democracy, that we cannot defeat the insurgents and that we have no intention of fixing the infrastructure we've destroyed.

So what did we accomplsih exactly? From reading this article, it sounds like even the bushies are admitting that Iraq has been a failure and a mistake on every front.

[Frank]

So what did we accomplsih exactly? From reading this article, it sounds like even the bushies are admitting that Iraq has been a failure and a mistake on every front.
If one buys into the theory (as I do) that the sole reason for invading Iraq was for Bush to depose Hussein - well, they did that.

[World Eater]

So what did we accomplsih exactly? From reading this article, it sounds like even the bushies are admitting that Iraq has been a failure and a mistake on every front.

Would could have literally threw that 400 Billion (and still counting) on a bonfire and got a better value for our money. I honestly can't fathom who would support these bozos.

[QuickSilver]

If one buys into the theory (as I do) that the sole reason for invading Iraq was for Bush to depose Hussein - well, they did that.

Yes, but in service of what?

[Jackknifed Juggernaut]

My friend got into a car accident with a tow truck. It was basically a no-fault type accident and the driver offerred to repair my friend's car for free, and leave the police out of it. He showed my friend his auto repair shop to prove that he was legit. My friend, being rather conservative, would normally call the police and tell the insurance company. In this case, he considered the $1,000 savings from not having to pay a deductible, and decided to let the garage fix his car. Well, they did a piss poor job patchwork type job. They didn't properly fix the dents, used the wrong color paint, and somehow managed to add some new scratches and dents on the other side of the car. My friend took his car back there several times over a couple of months, paying extra for public transportation each time his car was in the shop. Finally, he gave up and decided to live with a banged up car.

About a month after his last visit to the mechanic, he gets a bill for $1,000 for (paraphrasing) "expenses above and beyond what we agreed on". My friend was now fuming. He obviously was not going to pay. But he called them asked how they had the nerve to ask him for money. The response: It's not our fault you banged up your car.

tow truck/garage = USA
my friend/his car = Iraq

[Frank]

Yes, but in service of what?
In service of the desire of Bush to depose Hussein, what else?

[Metacom]

The United States had high hopes of quick, big-budget fixes on electricity that would show Iraqis tangible benefits from the ouster of Hussein.
But the electricity was working before his ouster. If we wanted to show them benefits of the war, shouldn't we have picked problems that the war didn't cause? :confused:

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

I really, really do hope that the George W. Bush Presidential Library is hidden behind a pork-rendering plant, or perhaps in a ravine someplace.

Or the Badlands of North Dakota! Yeah! Great idea!

[World Eater]

What's the over/under on the constitution draft getting completed today?

[GIGObuster]

What's the over/under on the constitution draft getting completed today?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2005/08/15/international/i074946D22.DTL
The Iraqi parliament delayed a session Monday on whether to approve a new constitution hours before a midnight deadline as faction leaders failed in last-minute talks to agree on a federated state and other divisive issues.


The delay came after some Iraqi politicians suggested that parliament should extend the deadline for approving the charter while others said it could be approved over Sunni objections as last-minute talks failed to produce agreement on a federated state and other divisive issues.


The 275-member National Assembly had been scheduled to convene at 6 p.m. (10 a.m. EDT) to consider the draft but moments ahead of the time, the meeting room in the heavily guarded Green Zone was absent of legislators.


It initially was delayed for two hours, but Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman said the parliament would not convene before 10 p.m. (2 p.m. EDT.)


The lawmakers have until midnight to reach agreement under an interim constitution.


Othman said meetings were still under way on the outstanding issues in the constitution and so far "no final agreements have been reached."

In other reports it was mentioned that an agreement will appear on time... regardless if the Sunni leaders don't approve. Shiite leaders threatened to ram the constitution through the Iraqi National Assembly.

Sounds like a shotgun wedding to me.

[Squink]

What's the over/under on the constitution draft getting completed today?Don't know, but they've got less than 3 hours to do something now.

[elucidator]

Moving the goalposts is just step one. Step two will be explaining that its all Michael Moore's/Clinton's fault.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Moving the goalposts is just step one. Step two will be explaining that its all Michael Moore's/Clinton's fault. Both Bill and Hillary. And don't forget Kerry; he's responsible too!

Heck, if it weren't for those godless homo traitor liberals stabbing America in the back, we woulda won.

[ElvisL1ves]

Any guesses on the exact date of Kurdistan Indepence Day? I'll take March 12, 2006 in the pool. The formal alliance of the newly-elected, sharia-based Shiite theocracy in Iraq with the one in Iran can't be long afterward.

Turkish PM Erdogan is starting a peace-and-reconciliation campaign with the Kurds in Turkey. That's a good thing anyway, but he can't be unaware that there could be an even stronger desire for secession among them if there's an adjacent independent homeland willing to expand its borders.

[MaxTheVool]

Moving the goalposts is just step one. Step two will be explaining that its all Michael Moore's/Clinton's fault.

I think it's Hillary Clinton's and John Kerry's fault... remember, they didn't oppose the war, so they must bear just as much responsibility as Bush.

[Squink]

Iraq Leaders Agree on Draft Constitution (http://www.normantranscript.com/feeds/apcontent/apstories/apstorysection/D8C0D0DO0.xml.txt/resources_apstoryview) Iraqi leaders have agreed on a draft constitution to be submitted to parliament by Monday's deadline except for two issues that the legislative body must decide, two Shiite officials said.

[GIGObuster]

Iraq Leaders Agree on Draft Constitution (http://www.normantranscript.com/feeds/apcontent/apstories/apstorysection/D8C0D0DO0.xml.txt/resources_apstoryview)

the document would be handed over to the 275-member National Assembly late Monday for a decision on the two unresolved issues, which he did not specify.

[college "C" student]
I'm getting an incomplete!
[/college "C" student]

[Revtim]

Have they been using the "fight terrorists there instead of here" excuse anymore? Or did too many people see this was a contradiction with the "we did it for the Iraqi people" excuse? ("Let's free them from Hussein who terrorized them, but make their home a magnet for terrorism")

[RedFury]

What's the over/under on the constitution draft getting completed today?

It's an exercise in futility anyway. Part of the "reality" that still hasn't sunk in is that as soon as the US makes haste and withdraws -- and I very much doubt a retreat to permanent bases will be acceptable to Iraqis in general -- odds are the National Assembly will fade into oblivion. I mean, really, even now they hold no real clout outside The Green Zone.

Ironically enough, that may yet turn out to be the best move for the US's interests, for all signs point to a psuedo-alliance with the Shiite brethen in Iran if the status-quo were to prevail.

[Stuffy]

[college "C" student]
I'm getting an incomplete!
[/college "C" student]


According to my local news, the two unresolved issue are women's rights and Kurdish autonamy.

[RedFury]

Moving the goalposts is just step one. Step two will be explaining that its all Michael Moore's/Clinton's fault.

This is one time I must say you've been caught napping, 'luc. Because, even here in the SDMB, that well known "bastion of liberal thought," they've been going full bore with the 'let's blame Michael Moore for all the sins of our Asshole In Chief' for some time now.

Clearly, marching orders have been issued on this matter.

Couple of samples, here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6475539&postcount=212) and here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6461129&postcount=59).

[rjung]

What RedFury said. Far as the Bush apologists are concerned, it's never too early to blame the "leftists" (i.e., anyone who disagrees with Brainless Leader) for the nation's problems and missteps.

I'm sure the folks over at Fox News are even now busily working out how to point fingers at Cindy Sheeham over this, too.

[Squink]

According to my local news, the two unresolved issue are women's rights and Kurdish autonamy.
Whoops: Iraqi Parliament OKs Constitution Delay (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050815/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq) Iraq -
Iraq's parliament agreed to a seven-day extension for leaders to complete a draft constitution, after politicians failed to reach a midnight Monday deadline to agree on the charter. Parliament adjourned after voting to extend the deadline until Aug. 22, acting on a request from Kurdish leaders for more time.
I hope they passed their extension resolution with a large enough majority to overide the Interim Constitution (http://www.cpa-iraq.org/government/TAL.html). Otherwise everything from here on out will be illegal.

[shelbo]

If one buys into the theory (as I do) that the sole reason for invading Iraq was for Bush to depose Hussein - well, they did that.

Ya know, for $350 Billion, I bet you could have bought the Iraqi army, and had them take out Hussein. Hell, for $350 MILLION, you could have bought a couple of key generals, and taken out Hussein.

[The Great Sun Jester]

Man! IF they're admitting it's this bad, can you imagine how awful it REALLY must be over there? ! ? !

[The Great Sun Jester]

Ya know, for $350 Billion, I bet you could have bought the Iraqi army, and had them take out Hussein. Hell, for $350 MILLION, you could have bought a couple of key generals, and taken out Hussein.
For $350 billion we could have assembled a full time self-sufficient lunar base with a particle-beam gun and shot Saddam's eye out!

And still have some dough left over to pay the gays off to not marry in public.

[rjung]

But the oil fields, those cost extra!

[Revtim]

Man! IF they're admitting it's this bad, can you imagine how awful it REALLY must be over there? ! ? !That's a frightening point.

[Gala Matrix Fire]

Unfortunately, this new "candor" will probably win them back a bunch of voters.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

I really, really do hope that the George W. Bush Presidential Library is hidden behind a pork-rendering plant, or perhaps in a ravine someplace.

Or the Badlands of North Dakota! Yeah! Great idea!

Why ruin the Badlands? I was just there camping and hiking with my girlfriend weekend before last. Bison, elk, mustangs, prairie dogs. It was plum purdy! Besides...everyone (at least anyone who's seen the Medora Musical (http://www.medora.org/today/musical.asp)) knows that's Teddy Roosevelt country. :p

[Cervaise]

Unfortunately, this new "candor" will probably win them back a bunch of voters.Don't worry. The candor will ebb.

[jayjay]

Don't worry. The candor will ebb.

And now I must smack Cervaise for forcibly inserting the image of Dick Cheney in fishnets and bustier singing "Life is a cabaret, old chum!" to George W. while Osama bin-Laden walks by outside singing "Tomorrow belongs to me"...

[RickJay]

Any guesses on the exact date of Kurdistan Indepence Day? I'll take March 12, 2006 in the pool. The formal alliance of the newly-elected, sharia-based Shiite theocracy in Iraq with the one in Iran can't be long afterward.
That isn't long enough for a really horrible, bloody civil war. First you have to have the US withdraw in disgrace, and only then can the killing really begin in earnest. Then, you need a Kurdish strongman to emerge from the blood and chaos to declare a Kurdish Islamic Republic. This stuff takes time.

I'm guessing September 27, 2007.

[Guinastasia]

Think we'll get footage of the helicoptors pulling out, ala Vietnam?

[World Eater]

Think we'll get footage of the helicoptors pulling out, ala Vietnam?

Nah, they'll probably recycle that footage of the SH statue getting yanked down, and repeat how we liberated Iraq ad nauseum.

[GIGObuster]

Nah, they'll probably recycle that footage of the SH statue getting yanked down, and repeat how we liberated Iraq ad nauseum.

I still remember that FOX news called that footage "gold" for the Bush administration, that footage remains IMO the first big lie of the occupation:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2838.htm

The BBC website had the honesty to say that "dozens" of Iraqis were involved, but this grain of truth was swamped by the overwhelming impression of mass joy. The radio and TV were even worse.

[Siege]

The funny thing is, a few years ago when I opposed this war precisely because I thought it would wind up like this, I was called "unpatriotic". I'm not unpatriotic, just realistic.

CJ

[World Eater]

Pretty sad that Iraqis squabbling over the constitution is labelled "democracy at work". :rolleyes:

[ElvisL1ves]

Then, you need a Kurdish strongman to emerge from the blood and chaos to declare a Kurdish Islamic Republic. This stuff takes time.
Only if you have large ethnic groups in conflict over the same territory. Not the case here - the northern reaches of what has been Iraq since the 1920's are Kurd-dominated, with some recently-transplanted Sunni Arab population that's already been effectively subjugated. All plausible forms of the next temporarily pan-Iraqi government have the Kurdish region internally autonomous, as it has effectively been since GW1, and with fairly well-defined borders at that (including substantial oil fields).

No civil war is on the horizon - who would the opponent be? If the next Kurdish leader, "strongman" or otherwise, tells the mullahs in Baghdad "Goodbye and good luck, the West's promise to recognize our independence is just as old as Iraq itself and we're finally going to make it happen", who's going to stop him?

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

Only if you have large ethnic groups in conflict over the same territory. Not the case here - the northern reaches of what has been Iraq since the 1920's are Kurd-dominated, with some recently-transplanted Sunni Arab population that's already been effectively subjugated. All plausible forms of the next temporarily pan-Iraqi government have the Kurdish region internally autonomous, as it has effectively been since GW1, and with fairly well-defined borders at that (including substantial oil fields).

No civil war is on the horizon - who would the opponent be? If the next Kurdish leader, "strongman" or otherwise, tells the mullahs in Baghdad "Goodbye and good luck, the West's promise to recognize our independence is just as old as Iraq itself and we're finally going to make it happen", who's going to stop him?

Except that the West isn't going to honor that. The reason is Turkey.

Turkey is hostile to a Kurdish national state, as there are Kurdish rebels in their own eastern provinces, & Istambul fears seccession.

[ElvisL1ves]

So what is the West able to do about it? Is the Turkish army going to roll over the border and suppress the Kurdish Assembly? Is any other army? The Turks have their hands full with the uprising inside their own country as it is.

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

So what is the West able to do about it? Is the Turkish army going to roll over the border and suppress the Kurdish Assembly? Is any other army? The Turks have their hands full with the uprising inside their own country as it is.


The Turks quite likely would cross the border, into a separate Kurdistan.
After all, it's rather likely that the Kurdish rebels have been "border-hopping" to avoid the Turkish military. Istambul may view this as killing 2 birds with one Division of armor.

A helpful profile of Turkey. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/1022222.stm)

:)

[ElvisL1ves]

To the contrary, Erdogan is taking a conciliatory approach, the only effective one available to him (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/08/mil-050812-26bd5226.htm). Do you really think he's foolish enough to do what Bush has done, with much less military ability at his disposal?

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

To the contrary, Erdogan is taking a conciliatory approach, the only effective one available to him (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/08/mil-050812-26bd5226.htm). Do you really think he's foolish enough to do what Bush has done, with much less military ability at his disposal?

He doesn't have to hold terrain or form a government like Bush.
He merely needs to kill Kurds.
Do not forget what happened to the Armenians in Turkey!

No, I think it best that there be no independent Kurdistans.

Best for the Kurds, most of all.

[Merijeek]

Think we'll get footage of the helicoptors pulling out, ala Vietnam?

Nah, they know how...petulant our president is. He's liable to have everyone turn around or just start launching airstrikes if they Iraqis don't hold it together until our surface groups get past 12 miles out.

-Joe

[ElvisL1ves]

He doesn't have to hold terrain or form a government like Bush.
He merely needs to kill Kurds.
Do not forget what happened to the Armenians in Turkey!I hope you're joking. This isn't like you at all.

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

I hope you're joking. This isn't like you at all.

I'm not advocating it, dammit, I'm very afraid of what the Turks might do.

And they did it before.

So, maybe there's cause to be worried.

[Cerri]

The funny thing is, a few years ago when I opposed this war precisely because I thought it would wind up like this, I was called "unpatriotic". I'm not unpatriotic, just realistic.

CJ


Ditto.

You know, I can say with all honesty, I've never been so saddened and disappointed to be proven right.

[ElvisL1ves]

I'm very afraid of what the Turks might do.
And they did it before.
So, maybe there's cause to be worried.There's not quite as much reason as there is to be worried that Germany will invade Belgium again. Ater all, they've done that twice, and even more recently than the Turkish invasion of Armenia.

Don't you think the world is perhaps just a slightly different place now than it was a century ago?

[Biggirl]

Can't trust those Turks! Look what they did to Constantinople. Obliterated from the map, it was!

[jayjay]

Can't trust those Turks! Look what they did to Constantinople. Obliterated from the map, it was!

Yeah, but that's nobody's business but the Turks'...

[Mtgman]

Can't trust those Turks! Look what they did to Constantinople. Obliterated from the map, it was!
Damnit! I had a date in Constantinople. :(

Enjoy,
Steven

[ElvisL1ves]

Better than an appointment in Samarra, at least at present.

[jayjay]

Damnit! I had a date in Constantinople. :(


She's waiting in Istanbul.



Have you noticed that once They Might Be Giants manages to get a toehold in your mental hearing centers, you'll never be free again?

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

Don't you think the world is perhaps just a slightly different place now than it was a century ago?


Tell it to the Tutsis. :dubious:

[Squink]

Tell it to the Tutsis.Hutu?

[Loopydude]

Amazing, Washington is now admitting that Iraq will not be a democracy, that we cannot defeat the insurgents and that we have no intention of fixing the infrastructure we've destroyed.

So what did we accomplsih exactly? From reading this article, it sounds like even the bushies are admitting that Iraq has been a failure and a mistake on every front.

Can somebody please explain to me why these fuckers are not in jail? Please? What, I can make meth in my basement and go to jail for ten years, but if I lie out my fucking ass for a year to start a war, completely invade and dismantle a sovereign nation under those false pretenses, kill tens of thousands of innocent people, waste the lives of our soldiers, squander our goodwill after 9/11 so now we're more hated than ever before, and royally fuck up just about every possible strategic decision that could be royally fucked up, in a span of months racking up a Vietnamesque list of blunders, and...and...I get reelected?

Re-FUCKING-elected?

What the fuck happened to this country? What? Why do I feel like I've been teleported to bizarro-world? What in the holy fuck happened? Jesus H. Fucking Christ on a Flaming Pogostick, my fellow Americans, why did you let this happen?

[L. G. Butts, Ph.D.]

I'm not advocating it, dammit, I'm very afraid of what the Turks might do.

And they did it before.

So, maybe there's cause to be worried.

I agree; I am worried about this also. I have been worried about the Turks in this regard for years.

[RickJay]

Re-FUCKING-elected?

What the fuck happened to this country?
Wasn't Nixon re-elected four years after promising to end the war in Vietnam?

[Loopydude]

Oh yeah. Thanks for reminding me. We're stupid, and we stay stupid. Gawd, for a moment there I actually had this funny illusion that a society ought to really learn from its mistakes. Crazy, huh?

[World Eater]

Oh yeah. Thanks for reminding me. We're stupid, and we stay stupid. Gawd, for a moment there I actually had this funny illusion that a society ought to really learn from its mistakes. Crazy, huh?

You must admit though, it's fascinating to be alive during the time America jumped the shark.

[Rufus Xavier]

"The truth is far more powerful than any weapon of mass destruction."

- Mohandas K. Gandhi

[Merijeek]

Amazing the lack of response from our Usual Suspects.

They just busy awaiting instructions?

-Joe

[rjung]

Too busy digging for dirt on Cindy Sheehan, I'd wager.

[World Eater]

Yeah, I was hoping to see some of their responses, but I guess that ain't going to happen.

[Apos]

Even Republicans seem to be resigning themselves to this, from a surprising source:

TOM DELAY: "I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"

Oh, wait. That was him talking about Bosnia. A war in which an ongoing genocide was stopped without a single American casualty, and the post-war was far far better managed.

[Loopydude]

Oh yeah? Oh yeah? Wul...wul....Clinton got his dick sucked an lied about it! WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA!

[Princhester]

Think we'll get footage of the helicoptors pulling out, ala Vietnam?

No, no, no. Mustn't draw parallels with Vietnam. That is strictly, strictly verboten. Not allowed. And completely untrue.

When right wing history records that the Iraq mess was lost because of weak kneed pansies making the US military fight with one hand tied behind its back, that also will not, under any circumstances give rise to any entitlement to mention the V word.

[World Eater]

Even Republicans seem to be resigning themselves to this, from a surprising source:

TOM DELAY: "I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"

Oh, wait. That was him talking about Bosnia. A war in which an ongoing genocide was stopped without a single American casualty, and the post-war was far far better managed.

Wow, I'm speechless.

[Merijeek]

No, no, no. Mustn't draw parallels with Vietnam. That is strictly, strictly verboten. Not allowed. And completely untrue.

When right wing history records that the Iraq mess was lost because of weak kneed pansies making the US military fight with one hand tied behind its back, that also will not, under any circumstances give rise to any entitlement to mention the V word.

Vagina?

You sex-obsessed Democrats disgust me.

Fuckin libruls.

-Joe

[Apos]

Wow, I'm speechless.

Yeah: real princes of consistency, no?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/17/144732/740

"[The President] . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

Not telling us how much it will cost??!!! An outrage!

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)


How dare he demand an exit strategy?! Does he hate the troops and or America and want to encourge the ethnic cleansers??!

[Larry Mudd]

Even Republicans seem to be resigning themselves to this, from a surprising source:

TOM DELAY: "I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions..."Ha!

You had me there, for a second.

[Maus Magill]

Can somebody please explain to me why these fuckers are not in jail? Please? What, I can make meth in my basement and go to jail for ten years, but if I lie out my fucking ass for a year to start a war, completely invade and dismantle a sovereign nation under those false pretenses, kill tens of thousands of innocent people, waste the lives of our soldiers, squander our goodwill after 9/11 so now we're more hated than ever before, and royally fuck up just about every possible strategic decision that could be royally fucked up, in a span of months racking up a Vietnamesque list of blunders, and...and...I get reelected?

But what if God chose you to make meth in your basement for Freedom (TM) and Liberty (TM)?


God Bless my Meth Lab
Dope that I love

[Merijeek]

How dare he demand an exit strategy?! Does he hate the troops and or America and want to encourge the ethnic cleansers??!

IOKIYAAR.

It's not just an acronym, it's a way of life.

The really fun thing is you get to have a whole bevy of dupes who will mentally contort themselves all day long at your whim. And you get to screw them over and over...and they'll thank you for it. Because, no matter what you do, at least you're not one of them.

-Joe, one of them

[Squink]

-Joe, one of them
Chuck Hagel's one of them too:
"We are seen as occupiers, we are targets. We have got to get out. I don't think we can sustain our current policy, nor do I think we should,"In U.S. heartland, anxiety over Iraq, oil (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050818/ts_nm/iraq_heartland_dc_1)

[Merijeek]

Chuck Hagel's one of them too:
In U.S. heartland, anxiety over Iraq, oil (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050818/ts_nm/iraq_heartland_dc_1)

It's disgusting how low the libruls of this country will sink. If you don't like it here, Hagel, go back to France! Or Russia! Or some other Commie country like Japan!

I wish Steph90210 would come in here and show us some evidence that Hagel is merely Michael Moore's puppet. I mean, we all know it deep down. We just need him to connect the dots for us.

If only this country had a strong Republican president we wouldn't have these problems! Everyone knows that it's those faggot commie Democrats that can't handle foreign affairs and national defense!

Vote out the goddamned incompetent Democrat pussy from the Oval Office so we can get a REAL MAN, a true Gawd-Fearing Republican in there to set things straight!

May the soul of Saint Ronnie come back to us and show us the way!

-Joe, fears he is turning into luci

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

-Joe, fears he is turning into luci Could be worse -- could be Reeder. :p

[Merijeek]

Could be worse -- could be Reeder. :p

You don't understand! It's all about NATIONAL DEFENSE!!!!

Everyone knows that Democrats are WEAK ON NATIONAL DEFENSE!!!

Everyone knows that Republicans are STRONG ON NATIONAL DEFENSE!!!

Since it's a matter of NATIONAL DEFNESE!!! it is a tautology that the problems in Iraq are the Democrats' fault because everyone knows Democrats are weak on NATIONAL DEFENSE!!!

Why are the Democrats causing all these problems in Iraq? If only Bill O'Reilly was president*! Or Rush Limbaugh**! Or Ann Coulter***!

-Joe, doing a duffer impersonation

* - Heart palpatations started yet?
** - How about now?
*** - I may be getting tried for manslaughter here...but still, isn't about time we had our first mare president?

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

*** - I may be getting tried for manslaughter here...but still, isn't about time we had our first mare president? Which is to say, whether it's a mare or a horse's ass in the Oval Office, the output is still manure.

[World Eater]

Quote:
"[The President] . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

I bet when confronted with this the spin would be that "we can't put a price on freedom" or "whatever it costs to protect the contry". A bunch a vague bullshit.

Quote:
"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

These are a bit easier, our mission is to win the war on terror and our exit strategy is to "see this fight to the end", which of course will never fucking happen.

[rjung]

I bet when confronted with this the spin would be that "we can't put a price on freedom" or "whatever it costs to protect the contry". A bunch a vague bullshit.
Haven't you heard? "9/11 changed everything" erases all Republican hypocrisy.

[New Iskander]

The horses are getting their hoofs wet.

[World Eater]

The horses are getting their hoofs wet.

I don't get it.

[Squink]

World Eater, it is time to hang your head in shame and ask for this thread to be closed. You have been rebutted, and your evil intent exposed:
Joint chiefs chairman says expectations not lowered in Iraq (http://www.dcmilitary.com/army/pentagram/10_33/national_news/36631-1.html) The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Wednesday dismissed rhetoric that the United States has lowered its expectations in Iraq.
Speaking with Matt Lauer in Baghdad, Iraq, on NBC's "Today" program, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers blamed the rhetoric on people hoping to expose a rift between military leaders in Iraq and officials in Washington.
Emphasizing that plans in Iraq are "on track," the United States' top military officer said those who say otherwise are "are trying to find some divide between the military leadership over here and the folks back in Washington and so forth."
"I can guarantee you there is none," Myers said. Why do you hate America?

General Myers went on to explain America's difficulties in Iraq:"This is a different kind of war," ... "and it's the nature [of it] that this enemy keeps adapting." I'll bet you had no idea that this is the first war in which America's enemys actually adapt to our tactics, now did you? ;)

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

General Myers went on to explain America's difficulties in Iraq: I'll bet you had no idea that this is the first war in which America's enemys actually adapt to our tactics, now did you? ;) How dare they?!? Haven't they read the script we prepared for them?

[RedFury]

Stop it with all the doom and gloom! You're simply looking at things the old way and...

"That's not the way the world really works anymore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_based_community)," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

[New Iskander]

I don't get it.All your criticism of Iraq invasion is exact copy of what Bush and Santorum said about Kosovo. You are channeling Bush! Is it sad or funny?

[jayjay]

All your criticism of Iraq invasion is exact copy of what Bush and Santorum said about Kosovo. You are channeling Bush! Is it sad or funny?

Except this time it's true? Drink some more Kool-Aid, Iskander. We wouldn't want you to have to actually think about what this administration's done or anything...

[Homebrew]

All your criticism of Iraq invasion is exact copy of what Bush and Santorum said about Kosovo. You are channeling Bush! Is it sad or funny?
How many soldiers died then? How long were we there? How many European Allies helped out?

Gosh, you're right. No difference at all.

[World Eater]

All your criticism of Iraq invasion is exact copy of what Bush and Santorum said about Kosovo. You are channeling Bush! Is it sad or funny?

I dunno, you'll agree that Kosovo went a hell of a lot better then Iraq is currently going, right?

[New Iskander]

I agree, Kosovo is not Iraq and Iraq is not Kosovo.

Kosovo is not in the Middle East, has only two ethnic groups.

Iraq is 40 times bigger, 13 times the population and so on...

[jayjay]

Iraq is 40 times bigger, 13 times the population and so on...

Which, I don't know...should have been taken into account while planning for this goddamn stupid war, ya think?

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Which, I don't know...should have been taken into account while planning for this goddamn stupid war, ya think?
Naw, that would have been reality-based.

[Zoe]

We need to cut the President some slack for a moment and ask ourselves if he did his best to live up to his promises. After all, best is best:

What was his military philosophy as he ran for the highest office in the land?

(From the 2000 Presidential Debates (http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2000c.html)):

MEMBER OF AUDIENCE: Today our military forces are stretched thinner and doing more than they have ever done before during peacetime. I would like to know what you are -- I think we would all like to know what you as president would do to ensure proper resourcing for the current mission and/or more selectively choosing the time and place that our forces will be used around the world.

(Response by Gore followed by this response from then Candidate Bush):

It must be in the national interests, must be in our vital interests whether we ever send troops. The mission must be clear. Soldiers must understand why we're going. The force must be strong enough so that the mission can be accomplished. And the exit strategy needs to be well-defined. I'm concerned that we're overdeployed around the world. See, I think the mission has somewhat become fuzzy. Should I be fortunate enough to earn your confidence, the mission of the United States military will be to be prepared and ready to fight and win war. And therefore prevent war from happening in the first place. There may be some moments when we use our troops as peacekeepers, but not often. The Vice President mentioned my view of long-term for the military. I want to make sure the equipment for our military is the best it can possibly be, of course. But we have an opportunity -- we have an opportunity to use our research and development capacities, the great technology of the United States, to make our military lighter, harder to find, more lethal. We have an opportunity, really, if you think about it, if we're smart and have got a strategic vision and a leader who understands strategic planning, to make sure that we change the terms of the battlefield of the future so we can keep the peace. This is a peaceful nation, and I intend to keep the peace. Spending money is one thing. But spending money without a strategic plan can oftentimes be wasted. First thing I'm going to do is ask the Secretary of Defense to develop a plan so we are making sure we're not spending our money on political projects, but on projects to make sure our soldiers are well-paid, well-housed, and have the best equipment in the world.

He said that we would not often use our troops as peacekeepers and he has kept his word.

With all due respect...

[New Iskander]

We need to cut the President some slack for a moment and ask ourselves if he did his best to live up to his promises.
.....

He said that we would not often use our troops as peacekeepers and he has kept his word.There is a good long-standing American tradition to decieve the population by promising peace and delivering war. Woodrow, Franklin, George...

Why do you hate America?

[New Iskander]

Which, I don't know...should have been taken into account while planning for this goddamn stupid war, ya think?Are you arguing that Clinton would do Iraq invasion better?

[kaylasdad99]

Are you arguing that Clinton would do Iraq invasion better?Not to speak for jayjay, or anything, but that's a baseless question. The Iraq invasion was not needed (during 1993-2001 or 2003). Clinton did deal with Iraq better than George the Lesses did, inasmuch as he didn't have an [unnecessary] Iraq invasion.

[RedFury]

:::cue ominous mucic:::

This is your brain:
Which, I don't know...should have been taken into account while planning for this goddamn stupid war, ya think?
This is your brain on Isk:
Are you arguing that Clinton would do Iraq invasion better?

Speak with your kids about the dangers of Isk, today.

-This message brought to you by the Free America Foundation-

[rjung]

We had competent leadership for Kosovo.

[jayjay]

Are you arguing that Clinton would do Iraq invasion better?

Why, yes. Yes, I am. Because Clinton wouldn't have done the Iraq invasion at all. Which would have been better.

Rather, Clinton probably would have actually finished the job in Afghanistan and actually, y'know, captured bin Laden. Instead of saying to the press less than a year later that bin Laden wasn't all that important to him and he hardly ever thought about him.

Like Bush did.

[World Eater]

Are you arguing that Clinton would do Iraq invasion better?

GW1 would have done it much better too.

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

GW1 would have done it much better too.

So would, OG help us, Richard Nixon.

And I truly believe that he was a better President than the one we've got.
:(

[XT]

Rather, Clinton probably would have actually finished the job in Afghanistan and actually, y'know, captured bin Laden. Instead of saying to the press less than a year later that bin Laden wasn't all that important to him and he hardly ever thought about him.

:p I'd like to know how Clinton would have done a better job in Afghanistan...and how he would have captured ObL. Of course, thats empty speculation as he wasn't president then, so we'll never know...but what, specifically, do you figure Clinton would have done in Afghanistan that would have made it better and allowed the US a better chance of capturing ObL?

-XT

[XT]

Oh, and I agree...our expectations in Iraq ARE sinking here in the US. Bush DID mishandle the invasion of Iraq (by having an invasion at all), and I actually agree that just about anyone who has been president in the last 50 years, excluding Carter and Johnson, who stuck our crank into Iraq, could have handled things better.

-XT

[jayjay]

...but what, specifically, do you figure Clinton would have done in Afghanistan that would have made it better and allowed the US a better chance of capturing ObL?

How about not packing up his (unfortunately not toy) soldiers and looking for a chance to play cowboy in a nation that had no capability whatsoever to so much as give us the willies?

[RedFury]

:p I'd like to know how Clinton would have done a better job in Afghanistan...and how he would have captured ObL. Of course, thats empty speculation as he wasn't president then, so we'll never know...but what, specifically, do you figure Clinton would have done in Afghanistan that would have made it better and allowed the US a better chance of capturing ObL?

How about by simply not diverting the great majority of your forces to the bogus Iraq quagmire? No military analyst am I and no desire to become one, but just using common sense tells me that having somewhere in the vicinity of an extra 150 thousand men at your disposal in his pursuit just might have made a difference. And no, I am not limiting myself to Bora Tora, but rather to all the time that's gone by since.

I'm fairly sure you speak Spanish, and if I am correct, it's not a stretch to surmise that you've heard the following proverb (if nothing else, surely you know we love the simple wisdom contained therein):
El que mucho abarca, poco aprieta
Will you please do the honors translation-wise?

[Pazu]

I agree, Kosovo is not Iraq and Iraq is not Kosovo.

Kosovo is not in the Middle East, has only two ethnic groups.

Iraq is 40 times bigger, 13 times the population and so on...

And it took Bush's war to discover this...?

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

El que mucho abarca, poco aprieta
Will you please do the honors translation-wise? I got it! I got it! (Courtesy of AltaVista's Babelfish handy-dandy translation program):

"The one that much sandal, little tightens"

:confused: Somehow, that doesn't look right. :dubious:

[jayjay]

I got it! I got it! (Courtesy of AltaVista's Babelfish handy-dandy translation program):

"The one that much sandal, little tightens"

:confused: Somehow, that doesn't look right. :dubious:

Heh. Courtesy of Google:

He who attempts too much, accomplishes little.

[New Iskander]

...Clinton wouldn't have done the Iraq invasion at all.Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence to support your statement. To the contrary, all the evidence points the other way. Clinton was pushing Saddam every half-a-chance he's got, authorized multiple bombing campaigns and even put the goal of Iraq regime change into US law. Just think, issuing US federal law decree authorizing regime change in a sovereign country! This is way more brazen then what Reagan ever done towards USSR. Clinton never ever compromised with Saddam, and nobody in Clinton administration ever said anything like this:

In Cairo, on February 24 2001, Powell said: "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."
or this:
Two months later, Condoleezza Rice also described a weak, divided and militarily defenceless Iraq. "Saddam does not control the northern part of the country," she said. "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."
Cite (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6456.htm)

I think if it was not for 'affaire Lewinsky', Clinton might have done it.

[RedFury]

I got it! I got it! (Courtesy of AltaVista's Babelfish handy-dandy translation program):

"The one that much sandal, little tightens"

:confused: Somehow, that doesn't look right. :dubious:

Listen up, you dweeb, I am trying to be serious here and you're not helping.

Geez, what do I hafta to do? Get self-righteous and smarmy? Just watch me.

jayjay, nailed it in one. Glad to see the import of this topic hasn't veered him off-track.

Pretty good, huh?



:)

[jayjay]

I think if it was not for 'affaire Lewinsky', Clinton might have done it.

What the fuck ever, Isk. You never make any sense anyway so I didn't really expect any now. Sure...Clinton would have tried to invade Iraq. Whatever you say. Now go lick Georgie's anus like a good little cultist.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Listen up, you dweeb, I am trying to be serious here and you're not helping.
Does this mean the job offer's (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6488818&postcount=129) been rescinded?

[New Iskander]

To dispel the notion that Clinton did a nice clean job in Kosovo, consider this (http://www.counterpunch.org/bodycount.html):

During the first month of the war on Yugoslavia, the NATO planes and cruise missile made over 10,000 attacks. More than 2500 cruise missiles were launched and over 7,000 tons of explosives were dropped. The following list is based on information provided by the Yugoslavian Foreign Ministry.

About 1,000 civilians, including 45 children ... were killed and more than 4,500 sustained serious injuries

Don't miss it, Red Fury. It even has that bomber picture you like so much.

[Spiny Norman]

Isn't it amazing how the "b-b-b-but Clinton!" line of misdirection never, ever goes out of style ?

[RickJay]

We had competent leadership for Kosovo.
Oh come on; the main benefit there was that Clinton at least didn't get 140,000 troops mired in a quagmire. The war was still ineptly run, as NATO succeeded in mostly killing innocent civilians and Chinese embassy staff, rather than enemy soldiers, and turning Kosovo into just as much of a hellhole as it was before except with different people getting run out of the country.

It still wasn't the monumental, Olympic-sized fuckup Iraq is, but it wasn't competent.

[jayjay]

Isn't it amazing how the "b-b-b-but Clinton!" line of misdirection never, ever goes out of style ?

"If Clinton did not exist, the Republicans would have to invent him."

[Frostillicus]

Originally posted by New Iskander

"During the first month of the war on Yugoslavia, the NATO planes and cruise missile made over 10,000 attacks. More than 2500 cruise missiles were launched and over 7,000 tons of explosives were dropped. The following list is based on information provided by the Yugoslavian Foreign Ministry.
About 1,000 civilians, including 45 children ... were killed and more than 4,500 sustained serious injuries "

Let's guess how many American troops died during the Kosovo operation. I'll give you a hint: It was less than 1.

[Frostillicus]

Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence to support your statement. To the contrary, all the evidence points the other way. Clinton was pushing Saddam every half-a-chance he's got, authorized multiple bombing campaigns and even put the goal of Iraq regime change into US law. Just think, issuing US federal law decree authorizing regime change in a sovereign country! This is way more brazen then what Reagan ever done towards USSR. Clinton never ever compromised with Saddam, and nobody in Clinton administration ever said anything like this:

Clinton didn't "authorize" jack-shit and you know it. There is a huge difference between stating a goal for the future (regime change in Iraq) and launching a full-scale invasion under false pretenses. And what's really funny is, if Clinton had NOT signed off on the goal of regime change in Iraq, you and your ilk would be screaming "Saddam-lover" from the rooftops.

[Merijeek]

There is a good long-standing American tradition to decieve the population by promising peace and delivering war. Woodrow, Franklin, George...


Liberal may be dying (sadly, at the same rate as the rest of us) but it's looking more and more likely that december's protege had a fairly serious stroke.

-Joe

[Zoe]

New Iskander: I think if it was not for 'affaire Lewinsky', Clinton might have done it.

Damn. Think how much better off our country might have been if someone had just given old George a little "tea and sympathy" behind closed doors.

[Merijeek]

And it took Bush's war to discover this...?

Them A-raybs are really sneaky. Do you have any idea how many rocks there are in Iraq? There were, like, 13 guys hiding behind every rock.

Maybe next our Fearless Leader will move from Faith-Based Mission Planning to just plain divination using the entrails of a chicken?

-Joe, sorry for the chicken but you know, eggs, omlettes

[rjung]

It still wasn't the monumental, Olympic-sized fuckup Iraq is, but it wasn't competent.
I never said it was flawless leadership. And considering the relatively low cost in lives and money, it looks like freakin' genius next to Dubya's Damn Fool War.

[RedFury]

Don't miss it, Red Fury. It even has that bomber picture you like so much.

You must be confusing me with someone else that fucked ya.

[RickJay]

I never said it was flawless leadership. And considering the relatively low cost in lives and money, it looks like freakin' genius next to Dubya's Damn Fool War.
No, what you said was that it was competent. It wasn't. It was simply a case of a big country bullying a smaller one and not even doing a good job of it, and incidentally doing plenty of lying to get us there. (Of course, in this case it was many big countries bullying a smaller one.) The fact that Bush has fucked up even worse does not make Kosovo a good thing. If you don't want the chickenhawks making dumb-ass Clinton comparisons, don't make any yourself. (Not that it will stop them.)

[Johnny L.A.]

I was opposed to the U.S. actions in Kosovo, but you have to admit it came off better than the charlie-foxtrot in Iraq. It was interesting, since Wag The Dog had somewhat recently been released, that the U.S. went to Kosovo shortly after the Lewinski affair came to light. My cynical nature saw too many parallels.

Yes, Clinton called for regime change in Iraq; but I do not believe he would have fabricated information and lied to the American people and the world in order to invade. Yes, he ordered strikes in Iraq; but those were legitimate under the UN rules since our aircraft were being targeted. Would he have captured or killed ObL? Maybe, maybe not; but I think he would have put more troops in Afghanistan and would have done a more thorough job. He would have gone after the terrorists and would have left Iraq for another day.

[Ludovic]

Clinton wouldn't have authorized the Iraq invasion because it would have been hugely unpopular before 9/11 ("nation-building", anyone?) It would have given the Republican congress more fodder than they already had to accuse him of being a loose cannon and wanting to start a lot of unnecessary and ill-conceived wars :rolleyes:.

Clinton and Bush both made mistakes. Their mistake was not pressing the war hard enough. By Bush, I mean HW Bush. So now, instead of armed militia groups vying for control of Iraq, several of which actually support the U.S., we have armed groups that all hate us (except maybe the Kurds?) since we let Saddam kill all the pro-american resistance. Thanks, Bush.

And we have Clinton to thank for helping millions die in Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Thanks a lot.

[Chefguy]

I hate coming in late to something: the original link doesn't work anymore.

[New Iskander]

Horses tasted the water and suddenly galloped away...

[jayjay]

Horses tasted the water and suddenly galloped away...

Fish ran the Indy 500 on Einstein Day...yellow.

[RedFury]

U.S. Lowers Sights On What Can Be Achieved in Iraq (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300853.html)

Administration Is Shedding 'Unreality' That Dominated Invasion, Official Says

[RedFury]

PS-The above link was for Chefguy and/or anyone else who missed reading the article from the OP's link.

[Evil Captor]

Clinton wouldn't have authorized the Iraq invasion because it would have been hugely unpopular before 9/11 ("nation-building", anyone?) It would have given the Republican congress more fodder than they already had to accuse him of being a loose cannon and wanting to start a lot of unnecessary and ill-conceived wars :rolleyes:.

Clinton and Bush both made mistakes. Their mistake was not pressing the war hard enough. By Bush, I mean HW Bush. So now, instead of armed militia groups vying for control of Iraq, several of which actually support the U.S., we have armed groups that all hate us (except maybe the Kurds?) since we let Saddam kill all the pro-american resistance. Thanks, Bush.

And we have Clinton to thank for helping millions die in Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Thanks a lot.

You are implying a false equivalence between Clinton and Bush that simply does not exist, a common tactic of right-wing apologists for Bush. Clinton would NEVER have invaded Iraq, not would Gore have, because the FACTS available at all times indicated that Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9/11 and that the case for Saddam's possession of WMDs was weak at best and nonexistent if you were reasonable. This blunder is strictly a result of idiot cowboy Bush wanting to ride off to war in a cloud of glory. There is NO equivalence to be had on the issue of Iraq between Gore and Clinton and Gore and anybody else. It's HIS stupidity and HIS arrogance that got us embroilled in Iraq, and no one in recent history comes even close to him.

[Colibri]

Isn't it amazing how the "b-b-b-but Clinton!" line of misdirection never, ever goes out of style ?

I think it's very telling that a knee-jerk rightwing dimbulb like Iskander can't think of any better line to justify the Iraq misadventure than "Well Clinton would have screwed up just as bad!" Of course, if the war were going well, Iskander and his ilk would never suggest in a million years that either Clinton or Gore would have had the balls to do it. That fact that he is alleging that Clinton would have done it is pretty much a concession that even he understands the whole thing is completely FUBAR.

This would be hilarious if it weren't so pathetic.

[Chefguy]

PS-The above link was for Chefguy and/or anyone else who missed reading the article from the OP's link.

Thanks. I'm completely unsurprised by this turn of events. The following:

"We didn't calculate the depths of feeling in both the Kurdish and Shiite communities for a winner-take-all attitude," said Judith S. Yaphe, a former CIA Iraq analyst at the National Defense University.

is stunning in its stupidity and naivete. In a region where hate and feuding is a way of life, what did they think would happen? That old tribal and religious animosity would just evaporate because some petty dictator was deposed? This is colonialist thinking at its worst. We never fucking learn, and it's most disheartening.

The aftermath of this whole thing will be as bloody and brutal as Saddam's regime ever was, and we will end up with a religious dictatorship now funded, trained and equipped by the U.S. Sound familiar?

[Larry Mudd]

So now, instead of armed militia groups vying for control of Iraq, several of which actually support the U.S., we have armed groups that all hate us (except maybe the Kurds?)....That's a bit naive. Sorry, but the Kurds hate y'all, too. They remember that they were cynically used and then fucked up the arse by the Nixon administration, even if you don't. Let me guess: You think they're warm and squishy for Uncle Sam because he turned on Saddam, right? And they don't like Saddam because of that little genocidal campaign, right? So we connect the dots and they've all got framed "GOD BLESS AMERICA" samples hanging in their parlours. Sorry, they remember that the U.S. was supporting Saddam when that unpleasantness took place, looked the other way, and kept supplying Saddam's regime with cash and materiel....since we let Saddam kill all the pro-american resistance.You know why Saddam was allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to kill off the resistance, right? Because that resistance was Shi'ite, and it was felt that a secular government like Saddam's, warts and all, was a better alternative (from a U.S. POV) than the possibility of a radical Islamist government, like Iran's.

"Pro-American resistance?" Right. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.

[New Iskander]

I think it's very telling that a knee-jerk rightwing dimbulb like Iskander can't think of any better line to justify the Iraq misadventure than "Well Clinton would have screwed up just as bad!" Of course, if the war were going well, Iskander and his ilk would never suggest in a million years that either Clinton or Gore would have had the balls to do it. That fact that he is alleging that Clinton would have done it is pretty much a concession that even he understands the whole thing is completely FUBAR.

This would be hilarious if it weren't so pathetic.Sigh. Must be another secret Limbaugh admirer. Opposites attract. You so much weaned on conservative talk shows, you can't recognize free-thinking argument at all.

I'm not saying that "Clinton would have screwed up just as bad!"; I'm saying war is terrible business, whether Kosovo or Iraq. The bigger the war, the more horrible it gets. However, prez after prez, across party lines, somehow find it necessary to wage wars. Could it be there is no other way?

I always maintained that "either Clinton or Gore would have had the balls to do it", and would do similar thing, perhaps a little better or worse. Even much maligned Carter would do closely as well as Reagan against USSR. Because there was no other way then and there is no other way now!

If anything, Dem. presidents are more warlike then Rep. ones.

Meanwhile, opposition always snipes from the sidelines. Bush was trashing Clinton Kosovo tactics, now Dems are trashing Bush. Much as you contort yourselves, you are not saying anything new.

[Squink]

Beyond lowered expectations, now there's a real whiff of Failure in the air:
Iraq Sunnis Urge U.S., U.N. to Block Draft (w) One day before the deadline for Iraq's new constitution, Sunni Arab negotiators appealed Sunday to the United States and the international community to prevent Shiites and Kurds from pushing a draft charter through parliament without Sunni consent.

[Spiny Norman]

I'm saying war is terrible business, whether Kosovo or Iraq. The bigger the war, the more horrible it gets. However, prez after prez, across party lines, somehow find it necessary to wage wars. Could it be there is no other way? What the fuck ? Are you seriously implying that it's simply your country's destiny to start war after war with no choice in the matter ?

So to make it completely clear: Yes, there is another way. Iraq was a war entirely by choice, and you and yours very well knew it, yet you pushed for it, against the warnings of your allies, a good part of the US electorate and basically speaking the rest of the world. But war you wanted and war you got. Now you have the fucking gall to come wringing your hands and say "it could be there is no other way", as if you were just a helpless pawn of destiny. You were not. You got the dirty little war you wanted so badly. Do not try to unload the responsibility, thanks.

Sheesh. "no other way".

[New Iskander]

What the fuck ? Are you seriously implying that it's simply your country's destiny to start war after war with no choice in the matter ?

So to make it completely clear: Yes, there is another way. Iraq was a war entirely by choice, and you and yours very well knew it, yet you pushed for it...I pushed for it?

Sincerely, my influence on starting the war is infinetissimal in comparison to Kerry's and Hillary's.

[Merijeek]

Beyond lowered expectations, now there's a real whiff of Failure in the air:
Iraq Sunnis Urge U.S., U.N. to Block Draft (w)

Can someone explain this to me?

1. "Election" is coming up
2. Sunnis boycott election
3. Sunnis do (expectedly) badly in election
4. Sunnis bitch about results of election

Can someone explain this to me? Or is it just a matter of "We thought the elections wouldn't be held because we were boycotting them - since they weren't cancelled we'd like to take back our boycotting and have a do-over"?

Are they really that...immature?

-Joe

[Colibri]

Sigh. Must be another secret Limbaugh admirer. Opposites attract. You so much weaned on conservative talk shows, you can't recognize free-thinking argument at all.

I've never listened to Limbaugh, nor to any other conservative talk show, so that's certainly not it.

I'm not saying that "Clinton would have screwed up just as bad!"; I'm saying war is terrible business, whether Kosovo or Iraq. The bigger the war, the more horrible it gets. However, prez after prez, across party lines, somehow find it necessary to wage wars. Could it be there is no other way?

I couldn't reply better to this than Spiny Norman already has. You are a true fucking moron.

[Princhester]

I pushed for it?

Yep. It's amazing what a million pig ignorant ants all pushing in the same direction can do.

[New Iskander]

Iraq was a war entirely by choice, and you and yours very well knew it, yet you pushed for it, against the warnings of your allies, a good part of the US electorate and basically speaking the rest of the world. But war you wanted and war you got.
Normally NI was wont to be about twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Spiny Norman was depressed NI could be anything up to eight hundred yards long

[Squink]

Are they really that...immature?Nope, they just recognize a good bargaining position when they see one.

TAL (http://www.cpa-iraq.org/government/TAL.html), also called the interim constitution: Article 61.

(A) The National Assembly shall write the draft of the permanent constitution by no later than 15 August 2005.

(B) The draft permanent constitution shall be presented to the Iraqi people for approval in a general referendum to be held no later than 15 October 2005. In the period leading up to the referendum, the draft constitution shall be published and widely distributed to encourage a public debate about it among the people.

(C) The general referendum will be successful and the draft constitution ratified if a majority of the voters in Iraq approve and if two-thirds of the voters in three or more governorates do not reject it. Regardless of the results of January's elections, the Sunnis comprise a majority in Anbar, Salahadin, and Nineveh provinces. In other words, they can kill an unpalatable constitution if they choose to do so.

[Squink]

Iraq's constitution could be seen as a draft 'peace pact' for warring parties. (http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0822/p01s02-woiq.html)

[LouisB]

I pushed for it?

Sincerely, my influence on starting the war is infinetissimal in comparison to Kerry's and Hillary's.Take heart; your ignorance is far from infinetissimal, especially compared to Kerry's and Hillary's.

[ElvisL1ves]

Can someone explain this to me?

1. "Election" is coming up
2. Sunnis boycott election
3. Sunnis do (expectedly) badly in election
4. Sunnis bitch about results of electionTribalism seems much stronger than nationalism there, which is pretty typical for nonindustrial postcolonial nondemocracies with nonorganic borders.

Thumbnail: The Sunnis have been in power for decades, and have used it oppressively, but they're a minority. A real election means they lose to a different faction, much larger than themselves, and with scores to settle. The longer the Sunnis can avoid the Shiites gaining power, especially with some veneer of legitimacy, the better, er, less bad for them.

Meanwhile, for those Sunnis who see the Shiite revenge as inevitable, it's better to fight back first, eh? And if the Americans are on the Shiite side by pushing this democracy stuff, they're the enemy too.

The Kurds? They get their own nation one way or another, with little or no fighting. There aren't many Arabs in the region, and the Shiites figure to be too busy establishing control over the rest. All the Kurds want from this new constitution is the right to secede.

[Squink]

Bush on today's constitutional consensus: Now Iraq's leaders are once again defying the terrorists and pessimists by completing work on a democratic constitution. The establishment of a democratic constitution will be a landmark event in the history of Iraq and the history of the Middle East. All of Iraq's main ethnic and religious groups are working together on this vital project. All made the courageous choice to join the political process, and together they will produce a constitution that reflects the values and traditions of the Iraqi people. Speech at Utah VFW (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050822-1.html)

It's past midnight in Baghdad now.

[ElvisL1ves]

A somewhat different take (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/22/iraq.main/index.html)Shiites and Kurds have agreed on the issue of federalism -- the degree of power held by provinces versus that held by a centralized government -- while the Sunnis haven't come onboard.
...
Sunni members of the committee rejected the move, with negotiator Saleh Mutlag saying the draft would be a losing proposition "for the Americans and even the Iraqis, even those what are going to be in the government."

"This constitution does not include the Sunni voice," Mutlag said. "It doesn't include other voices in Iraq."So what's the beef with federalism, which so many Americans defend as such an important principle for ourselves? We went through this in the 1850's and 60's already, sound familiar?Federalism -- which would split the country into as many as three regions with some degree of autonomy -- has been one of the major blocks delaying a draft constitution.

The issue hinges on control of Iraq's oil reserves, which are mostly in the Shiite-majority south and the Kurdish-majority north.

Sunnis, who live mostly in the oil-devoid central region of the country, oppose a federalist system that would keep oil profits in the hands of regional governments.Look for two more flags in the UN in a couple of years or less.

[World Eater]

Looks like they made it! Frankly I won't see how Iraq will be any different tomorrow, then it was yesterday, but at least Bush gets to tote some "progress". :rolleyes:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/22/iraq.main/index.html

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A draft Iraqi constitution Monday was delivered to national assembly lawmakers -- but with some points still needing to be thrashed out in the assembly.

Ah yes, the devil is in the details ain't it?

[Sal Ammoniac]

"Now Iraq's leaders are once again defying the terrorists and pessimists by completing work on a democratic constitution. The establishment of a democratic constitution will be a landmark event in the history of Iraq and the history of the Middle East. All of Iraq's main ethnic and religious groups are working together on this vital project. All made the courageous choice to join the political process, and together they will produce a constitution that reflects the values and traditions of the Iraqi people."

Well, that's what you get when your president doesn't read the newspapers -- a nice, heartwarming divorce from reality. In reality, the Shi'ites and Kurds decided to go it alone, cutting out the Sunnis almost completely over the past week. They have the votes in Parliament to get away with it in the short term, but what they don't have is the votes in enough of the provinces to pass the referendum in October. What are we left with? Status quo ante, I'm afraid.

[Squink]

Looks like they made it!
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/22/iraq.main/index.html
That's not clear yet. There are also stories like this: (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050822-1.html) Negotiators finished the draft on Monday and prepared to submit it to parliament as the lawmakers convened minutes before midnight. But the negotiators withdrew the draft in the final minutes because of fierce resistance from Sunnis over issues including federalism, which Sunnis fear could cut them out of most of the country's vast oil wealth.

[New Iskander]

Nitty-gritty takes long time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erie_Triangle):

Most of northwestern Pennsylvania came under Anglo-American control following a 1784 treaty with the Iroquois Confederacy. The following year, a boundary dispute between New York and Pennsylvania erupted...

The Triangle Lands problematically fell under neither New York nor Pennsylvania's charter, while both Connecticut and Massachusetts also spoke up with claims derived from their original colonial sea-to-sea grants...

Following some pressure from the new federal government, all four states surrended their claims to that entity, which then, in 1792, turned around and sold final rights to the 202,187 acres (81,822 hectares, or 818.22 km², or 315.91 m²) of land to Pennsylvania for 75¢ per acre or $151,640.25. Minimal compensation was also provided to Native Americans for their original cession...

How did Pennsylvania reward Federal Gov't for all the help? (http://www.rootsweb.com/~paerie/bates/batesVIII.htm)

When the time came for closing the transaction, the State, with Quaker shrewdness, offered one of the funded bonds of the General Government, commonly known as "continental certificates," which were then in decidedly bad credit, and demanded that interest should be allowed, according to the terms of its fact. This was rather a surprise to the Federal authorities, and a long correspondence ensued, in which the Commonwealth seems to have had the better of the argument. After considerable delay, her legal right to pay in the manner proposed was conceded, and she turned over the bond and received credit for the accumulated interest, as is shown in the bill of sale above printed. It is apparent that the State drove a very sharp bargain, but whether the transaction was much to her honor, may admit of some debate.

[Squink]

Sunnis threaten civil war as Iraq constitution deadline extended (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1746919,00.html) The (Bush) Administration hoped that involving Iraq’s Sunni minority in the constitutional drafting process would help to bring it back into the political mainstream and sap the violent insurgency.

But that prospect looked remote as Sunnis lined up to condemn their marginalisation and the federalism enshrined in the draft text.

“We reject the political process as it is now,” Saleh al-Mutlak, a prominent Sunni negotiator, told reporters outside the parliament chamber where members gathered last night.

[World Eater]

Huh? So you're comparing a tiny little turf battle to an area that hasn't seen stability in who knows how long?

[Squink]

Huh? So you're comparing a tiny little turf battle to an area that hasn't seen stability in who knows how long?He's got to make it look like rocket science somehow. Who cares if the first full flowering of the age of reason in government happened 250 years ago? In Iraq today are the re-embodied souls of Hamilton, Blount, Franklin, Madison, Hancock, Paine, Adams&Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Mason, Mifflin, Johnson, and all the rest. ;)

[New Iskander]

It might behoove us to ponder how the whole Universe is reflected in a drop of rainwater.



(are you pondering what I'm pondering?)

[wring]

(are you pondering what I'm pondering?)
sorry I can't see your navel from here.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

He's got to make it look like rocket science somehow. Who cares if the first full flowering of the age of reason in government happened 250 years ago? In Iraq today are the re-embodied souls of Hamilton, Blount, Franklin, Madison, Hancock, Paine, Adams&Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Mason, Mifflin, Johnson, and all the rest. ;) And here I was thinking the place was in the hands of a reincarnated Button Gwinnett (http://www.buttongwinnett.com/).

[Cervaise]

(are you pondering what I'm pondering?)If you're pondering the irony of how your ridiculously inept Bush Boosterism actually has a forceful effect in the opposite direction, then yes, yes I am.

[Squink]

And here I was thinking the place was in the hands of a reincarnated Button Gwinnett (http://www.buttongwinnett.com/).
An UpLifting tale ETF. I hope that's Chalabi

There's an article out called the Text of Proposed Iraq Constitution (http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050822/API/508221093&cachetime=3&template=dateline)
It's more of an outline than anything; perhaps the product of a too quick translation?
The numbering system is screwed up, and several articles seem to be missing from the draft.
Articles 2 and 36 look as if they could cause problems:
Article Two

The political system is republican, parliamentary, democratic and federal.

1. Islam is a main source for legislation.

- a. No law may contradict Islamic standards.

- b. No law may contradict democratic standards.

- c. No law may contradict the essential rights and freedoms mentioned in this constitution

Article 36
The State guarantees:

1. Freedom of expression by all means.

2. Freedom of the press, printing, advertising and publishing.

[New Iskander]

sorry I can't see your navel from here.ouch

[wring]

ouch
it's pierced????

[New Iskander]

If you're pondering the irony of how your ridiculously inept Bush Boosterism actually has a forceful effect in the opposite direction, then yes, yes I am.What "Bush Boosterism"? I thought we were discussing what might be going on behind the closed doors in Iraq legislative chambers. Isn't it clear that they are resolving hundreds of pesky "Erie Triangles"? Who's gonna get whose mitts on what? Not that US "founding fathers" were much different.

[World Eater]

What "Bush Boosterism"? I thought we were discussing what might be going on behind the closed doors in Iraq legislative chambers. Isn't it clear that they are resolving hundreds of pesky "Erie Triangles"? Who's gonna get whose mitts on what? Not that US "founding fathers" were much different.

Simply put, the divisions are a lot, lot deeper.

[kaylasdad99]

(are you pondering what I'm pondering?)I fink so, NI, but where are we going to get enough cotton candyto cover Fallouja to a depth of four-and-a-half-feet?






Narf!