I think Kerry is trying just that tack. We’ll see if it works.
Well what was he cracking eggs for if’n he didn’t want to do the cookin’?
If the Dems choose to seperate themselves on this issue, maybe. WMD or lack thereof may be crucial in this. Dems can just say, “We were lied to!” If Lieberman wins the nomination, I have a hard time seeing him take this tactic though.
I still think it’s the economy that will break Bush’s back if it does get broken.
What will the republican strategy be? Why starting another war, of course. A few deaths in Afghanistan are nothing compared to the glory of “liberating” Iraq. Likewise, the death toll/unending instabilty in Iraq can be subverted by focusing people’s fear and discontent on the evil of the month, whilst squashing debate and dissent in the name of patriotism.
Start another war with what? Most of the army combat forces are deployed overseas already. There isnt the capability for another war until the situation in Iraq is resolved and another war will bring even fewer allies then this last one did.
I hope your analysis is correct, but I’m not convinced yet. IIRC the Bush administration contended that they were capable of fighting mulitiple wars simultaneously when Iraq and N Korea both appeared to be looming crises.
Also an actual war may not be necessary if the talk is blustery enough. Some felt the congressional resolution authorizing force preceding the last elections favored the Republicans and helped distract from the dismal economy.
I agree with that and I sadly expect to hear much blustery sabre-rattling and playing of the national security card. I’d be surprised to see another shooting war before the election though.
The oil duct sabotaged two days ago is still on fire. Another one was sabotaged today.
In the past days and weeks members of the dissolved Iraqi military had been staging anti-American demonstrations demanding payment of their salaries but the US had refused. Some demonstrators had been killed by US forces. After threats were issued to attack American forces, the US has given in and said they will pay the salaries of about 250,000 ex-members of the Iraqi military.
Yeah, I saw something like this when I was checking out the resources.
But, what the heck is going on with those vehicle accidents? I would sure like to know the nature of those accidents (Call me cynical, but I wonder if they count hitting a mine a vehicle accident).
I mean, 32 deaths in vehicle accidents… Are they giving the troops beer to drink on duty? That is an incredible rate of deadly accidents, especially since many of our troops are driving Humvees, tanks and APC’s. How fast do you have to be going, and what do you have to hit, to kill someone in an armored vehicle. ( I really do not know)
The exploration of this matter may expose two things:
those are not really accidents- or-
there are some very poor controls over driving habits and safety measures in the region.
Nonetheless, I still must assert that those men and women would not be dead if we were not in Iraq AND any type of death during this action is still a casualty of the war. If two helicopters crash together while in the region, we have to attribute that to the mission they are on.
Thanks for the info memory leak. BTW- do you have a source on that info so I can track these developments as well?
Most people have no idea how dangerous it is to operate this equipment. This isn’t quite the same as taking the old Jeep Wrangler outside the town limits and tearing up some farmer’s fields.
It’s been many years for me, but I never participated in a large scale military exercise that didn’t have vehicle accidents (not this many of course, but on a per miles basis it may be comparable - these people have traveled hundreds of thousands of miles in these vehicles).
Included in the 32 accidents are a few accidental weapons discharges (there were also several during the war). You see these on weapons ranges all the time. The difference is on a range, everybody’s lined up and there’s a bunch of safety NCOs.
I’d also heard via network news (but never independently checked) that there were more fatalities due to accidents than enemy action during the war (I do know that during the first week this was true).
I know that at least 3 of the fatalities resulting from vehicle accidents were just that (I have a relative that was in that convoy and knew the 3 soldiers killed in the accident).
I don’t think anybody (least of all the military) would dispute that.
CNN maintains a fairly accurate list of fatalities going back to the beginning of the war.
Rumsfeld said that this is part of the continuing “war on terror.” Go figure. I thought it was mopping up the results of his half-assed war plan. Sounds like organized fedayeen militia to me.
