Well…I don’t know how quitely its being handled, as its on most of the major news web sites. As for why Bush didn’t televise it…well, why do you think he should? He’s already said he plans to do this…telling us again really serves no purpose. IMHO of course.
Too little too late IMHO…FWIW. This really DOES resemble the stupid slow build up we had in Vietnam. These folks are fucking morons…and WE, the people are fucking morons (collectively) for re-electing this putz.
Depends I guess on the eventual outcome. I doubt it will make much short term differences unless the wheels start coming off soon. If things stay as they have been…no, I don’t see it making a huge difference right now. LONG term…who knows?
AFAIK, he doesn’t need Congressional approval to move more troops into Iraq. The only hammer they had over his head was on the budget thing…and they caved in on that.
In other words, the Democrats recognized that GW is too stubborn to admit failure and with regard to Iraq they are in the minority in the senate.
If the Democrats in the senate were as mindlessly obstinate as GW, there would be a big mess because they wouldn’t appropriate money for the Iraq war. In that case the administration would probably start using Dept. of Interior money, or the like, to keep the army supplied while it was being withdrawn and that’s unconstitutional.
They are in a deep hole. If they can come up with a way to claim some sort of victory ,they can save face and the Republican Party. They need Osama (do they have him stashed ?) That would give him some points. If they can keep adding troops ,and quiet Iraq down, then they will be satisfied. To continue as is will be of no value. They are desperate and need something they can call good to happen. The easy answer is always …more troops.
Well…yeah. Hell, if they can pull off some kind of victory I’ll eat GW’s shoes myself. The trick, of course, is to pull that off somehow. :dubious:
Certainly…they have him right next to the space aliens at Groom Lake.
Um…yeah. Well, if they keep adding troops and Iraq DOES quiet down, then they would have done the right thing. I’ll be satisfied myself. You won’t be?
The trick, again, is to, having added more troops (at this late stage), actually accomplish something out of it. I’m not very sanguine about that prospect myself, mind.
You have a remarkable ability of stating the obvious.
Why is this second surge being handled so quietly?
Will it make any difference in Iraq?
Will it make any difference in the U.S., WRT war-related politics?
Can they do this without Congressional approval?
[/QUOTE]
It’s not a surge unless the troop levels return to prior levels–it’s an escalation. To prevent the current surge from becoming an escalation, a further influx is necessary…it’s the same “surge” but you need new levels to continue to call it a surge.
You know, if we started an internet rumor that the aliens would be somewhere in particular at some specific time to grab people and probe their Nixons, you would have a small crowd of the weirdest people in the country.
I have thoughts like that. Probably shouldn’t share them.
In point of fact, it is being done with congressional approval. Congress approved the use of military force in Iraq and a large number of Democrats voted for it.
Once military force is authorized it’s up to the executive department to determine how such force is used.
Yup. I was going to mention this, but as I’m considered one of the ‘conservative’ dopers, I figured it would be better if someone else did it first.
This is really one of the lessons we SHOULD have learned after Vietnam…its really difficult to extract a countries dick from the golf shoes once its been stepped on.