SOFA shopping continues...

On Friday Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki said that negotiations with the United States on a long-term security pact have come to loggerheads, strongly indicating that an Iraqi-U.S. strategic pact may not see the light of day before the aWol bu$h (mal)administration draws to a merciful end in January. "We have reached an impasse, because when we opened these negotiations we did not realize that the U.S. demands would so deeply affect Iraqi sovereignty and that is something we can never accept," Maliki told Jordanian newspaper editors during a visit to Amman.

Since March, the US and Iraqi governments have been "secretly" negotiating a long-term agreement that would provide a legal basis to define the United States role for the occupation of Iraq to continue after the current U.N. mandate expires on 31 December. "We can't extend the U.S. forces permission to arrest Iraqis or to undertake the responsibility of fighting terrorism in an independent way, or to keep Iraqi skies and waters open for themselves whenever they want," Maliki said in his first detailed comments on the negotiations. "One of the important issues that the U.S. is asking for is immunity for its soldiers and those contracting with it. We reject this totally," he added. (The next time some dipshit compares the occupation of Iraq with our forces in Korea, Japan, Germany, etc...ask them how many mercenaries we have running around shooting up those countries willy-nilly, murdering civilians at traffic roundabouts and be prepared for a blank stare.)

Back in November it was announced that bu$h and Maliki intended to finalize the agreement by the end of July of this year, shooting for an endorsement by the 275 member Iraqi parliament by years end.

That, however, looks unlikely.


Iraqi officials have begun to raise their voices in protest to the American draft proposals, on the grounds that the Americans were attempting to walk all over Iraqi sovereignty and "consolidate the occupation" - making explicit the implication that an agreement was unlikely before we have a different president.


Iraqi sources in Amman told the Middle East Times that Maliki assured leaders of the large Iraqi community in the Jordanian capital that his government would not accept a pact that in any way threatens Iraqi sovereignty. Sources close to the Prime Minister told the Middle East Times that Maliki told them in a meeting in Amman that the government has turned down four U.S. drafts proposed since March, adding it will take time before arriving at an agreement which would not cement U.S. presence, and getting it endorsed through parliament. Those same sources said that Maliki assured leaders of the large Iraqi community in the Jordanian capital that his government would not accept a pact that in any way threatens Iraqi sovereignty.

The Iraqi prime minister's remarks sharply contrasted with Bush's insistence, during a visit to Germany this week, that he was confident that differences would be ironed out and at reaching a strategic deal with Iraq.

Iraqi lawmakers have said they were facing U.S. pressure to meet deadlines on core issues regarding the status of their country that should take months to negotiate, particularly as the country is still in a state of war and with the large presence of the 150,000-strong U.S. troops currently there.

Last week, a majority of Iraq's parliament wrote to the U.S. Congress rejecting a long-term pact with America if it excludes a commitment to withdraw U.S. forces.

"The majority of Iraqi representatives strongly reject any military-security, economic, commercial, agricultural, investment or political agreement with the United States that is not linked to clear mechanisms obligating the occupying American military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq," the letter to Congress said.

Iraqi lawmakers said Baghdad had turned down two U.S. drafts this week alone, after a "toned-down version" with ambiguous wording allows the U.S. military free access to Iraqi bases and fails to set a time limit.

U.S. officials have insisted that Washington was not seeking "permanent bases" nor planning to use Iraq as a launching pad to attack neighboring countries, such as Iran and Syria.

Sources close to the negotiations have revealed that the rejected U.S. drafts on using Iraqi military bases excluded a time limit on access to the bases to "conduct military operations in Iraq and to detain individuals when necessary for imperative reasons of security." The authorization for these operations was identified as "temporary."

On immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts, the latest draft dropped the protection of civilian security contractors and confined immunity to U.S. military personnel only.

Iraqis strongly oppose the presence of tens of thousands of foreign private security contractors, after last year's killing of 17 Iraqis in Baghdad by Blackwater, a U.S. firm protecting American officials in Iraq.

Lawmakers, however, are also opposing immunity for U.S. troops and have vowed not to sign any deal that would protect the soldiers from suspected war crimes.

The negotiations will continue "until an agreement is reached" but Iraqi officials have made it abundantly clear that they will not rush headlong into the arms of the Americans just so political deadlines can be met in Washington. Especially if the agreement doesn't offer safeguards to Iraqi sovereignty and an end to occupation.

And by the way - don't go thinking that Sadr is beat down and gone back to his video game addiction. On Friday, he announced the formation of a new armed group to fight U.S. forces in Iraq. "The resistance will be carried out exclusively by a special group which I will announce later," Sadr said in a statement read out at a mosque in the Iraqi Shiite town of Kufa. "We will keep resisting the occupier until liberation or martyrdom."

This is what a Patriot looks like

Dr. Muthaffar Kurukchi could join the exodus of middle class professional Iraqis who have fled the war-torn country. He has British residency and the resources to leave. He has been kidnapped and threatened, incentive enough to pack it in, most would say, but he refuses to flee. Every morning he comes to Amal Private Hospital and treats the broken and burned, the casualties of the disastrous invasion and occupation of his country.

His staff of surgeons has dwindled from 36 to 6, but still they soldier on, caring for their countrymen who are caught in the crossfire. They repair limbs shredded by bullets, they remove shrapnel from the bodies of bombing victims, they treat burns and they treat bodies contorted and broken by torture.

He's heartbroken over the fragmenting of his country and disillusioned by the unfulfilled promises of the U.S. occupation, but he's determined to stay.

Kurukchi graduated from Baghdad University's medical school in 1963. He spent a few years in England, where he married a British woman, Mary Rogers, before returning to Iraq in 1971.

He became one of the country's orthopedic pioneers, earning his stripes by treating the horrendous war wounds of young Iraqi soldiers returning from the Iranian front in the 1980s. His government salary was about $360 a month; he supplemented it by opening Amal Private Hospital in 1989.

"For the government, we were working for peanuts, but at the same time, we had the ability to give medical services to the rich, to our neighbors the Kuwaiti princes, to the Palestinians," Kurukchi said. "I was able to live a very good life. Six hours of my day went to the poor, and I had the rest to myself, and I made very good money."

As Iraq spun out of control, his wife, a native Brit, left the country. She died of a heart condition in Amman last year. His adult children are scattered from Britain to Australia, and he has two grandchildren he has never met.

Still, he can't tear himself from Iraq.

"I am who I am because of Iraq. I was born here, raised here and educated here," he said. "I owe these people."

Kurukchi's daily routine takes him straight to the hospital and straight back. The kidnapping risk remains so high — the United Nations reports that at least 250 medical workers have been kidnapped in Iraq since 2003 — that his driver handles even his grocery shopping. He no longer can attend church, dine at restaurants or relax at a cafe.

"All those have become details from another life," he said with a wry laugh.

Dr. Kurukchi is the very picture of patriotism and dedication. The next time we come up with a new oath for physicians to swear, it ought to have his name.

When all else fails, change the talking points!

From the department of moving goalposts:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 24 — With American military successes outpacing political gains in Iraq, the Bush administration has lowered its expectation of quickly achieving major steps toward unifying the country, including passage of a long-stymied plan to share oil revenues and holding regional elections.

Instead, administration officials say they are focusing their immediate efforts on several more limited but achievable goals in the hope of convincing Iraqis, foreign governments and Americans that progress is being made toward the political breakthroughs that the military campaign of the past 10 months was supposed to promote.

Now, the focus has shifted to smaller, short-term goals - like authorizing a budget for the nation. (But the Iraqis are already in the process of doing that anyway.)

And of course, the Bush maladministration is all hot and bothered to get the U.N. mandate that authorizes the presence of the American occupiers renewed. (They do this routinely because it's a puppet government that would not exist for more than thirty days if the Americans weren't propping them up.)

And de-de-baathification, so members of Saddam Hussein's Baath party can reenter government service. (That's merely pro forma - former Baathists have been rehired on the q.t. for some time, because they are the ones who actually know how to, you know, do the jobs.)

The administration insists that they have not given up on their larger goals, averring that they will be met *eventually.* But damnit, they have to figure out a way to make lemonade, and do it pronto.

They sold the AEI's Surge™ scheme by packaging it as a necessity, needed to give the political process "breathing space" to achieve reconciliation. Tours were extended, leaving soldiers in combat for 15 months with only 12 months dwell-time. They sacrificed American lives like they meant nothing. And the Iraqi parliament went on vacation the entire month of August.
Tony "Karma's a Bitch" Snow excused the fecklessness of the Iraqi politicians with a blasé "It's 130 degrees in Baghdad in August," conveniently forgetting that his war-criminal boss sent American fighting forces into that hellhole, and they didn't even get the benefit of operating in an air conditioned Green Zone when it was 130 degrees.

But reconciliation didn't happen.

In fact, Maliki and Hashemi snipe at one another like two bleached-blond teenage girls vying for head cheerleader in a one-high-school Texas football town.

Instead of sucking it up and admitting that things didn't work as planned, they are insisting that modest steps such as these - if taken soon - could, maybe, perhaps, if they cross their fingers and say the right magic words in just the right order and cadence, perhaps while hopping on one foot and chanting "I believe" - set the stage for "more progress." You know - like the Surge™ set the stage for the arming of the Sunni thugs who in the past were the insurgents who were killing Americans. (Well, give 'em guns and money and you can rent some temporary loyalty...)

But not to fear! aWol is "applying pressure" on the Iraqi government to produce some sort of political progress. “If we can show progress outside of the security sector alone, that will go a long way to demonstrate that we are in fact on a sustainable path to stability in Iraq,” said one senior official, speaking on condition of anonymity. On Saturday, [U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan] Crocker said the military had created opportunities for progress, and added that there were "indications" that Iraqis wanted to move forward on the local and national levels. But he quickly dialed back the expectations and cautioned against expecting quick results on the core issues.

“We are seeing encouraging signs of movement. This is going to be a long, hard slog,” he said, apparently channeling Rumsfeld, "It is going to be one thing at a time, maybe two things at a time, we hope with increasing momentum,” he said. “It is a long-term process.”

Although violence has ticked downward in recent months, the administration has not touted this development, because if they did, scrutiny would surely follow, and that they certainly don't want.

Furthermore, there are clear signs that any influence Americans have over Iraqi politicians is dwindling. In the absence of religious and ethnic reconciliation, the expectation has been dialed back to "accommodation." An American official, again speaking on condition of anonymity, said “We can’t pass their legislation. We can’t make them like each other. We can’t even make them talk to each other."

Crocker at least realizes that “The political stuff does not lend itself to sending out a couple of battalions to help the Iraqi’s pass legislation.” Still, he insisted that there are some positive signs that Iraqis are interested in making their own headway. For example, he pointed to Provincial governors, who are pressing for a law to define their powers. “We are past the point where it is an American agenda,” the ambassador said. “It is what needs to be done in Iraqi terms.” (In plain English - this is how warlords are made.)

Officials in both Baghdad and Washington are both realistic about the fact that military gains are not enough to overcome the deep divides that separate Iraqi factions. But in both capitals there are leaders who still engage in magical thinking. “We need a grand bargain among all the groups,” said a member of the Iraqi government - speaking - you guessed it - anonymously.

The most disturbing part of the whole thing is the repeated references to "long hard slogs" and the allusions to extended, multi-year commitments of American forces, like it's no big deal. But it is a big deal. Maybe not to these worthless, faithless and feckless jackals who have nothing to lose. But to the rest of us, it sure as hell is.

And if you agree, vote Democratic. Give the congress a Democratic president, and just as importantly the votes to end the obstruction of the Republican wingnuts who have no qualms about obstructing progress at the expense of American lives.

George aWol Bush has made the biggest mess the world has ever seen, and intends to keep the fucking up going apace and leave a mess so dire that the next president won't be able to extract us from.

Don't let him get away with it. Congress holds the pursestrings. Not one dime without strings attached. Not one dime.

Live-Blogging the Presser

The incumbent has called a press conference for this morning.

I am expecting petulance in spades and that shrill tone his every utterance has taken on of late, as well as "that look" - you know the one I mean - the annoyed one...

The press is waiting in the Brady Briefing Room.

Here come the topics...

"Tomorrow Congress will attempt to override my SCHIP veto." And he wants FISA to be expanded and the overreaches made permanent. He wants the intel community to be able to spy on you and me unencumbered. They need to pass the remaining spending bills one at a time. (Why is he suddenly so pissy about omnibus bills?) Education and housing are also on his radar...ditto trade. "Congress needs to get moving on trade agreements..." Veterans issues and the VA appropriations bill. "I ask congress to send me a 'clean bill' without unnecessary spending." And the Mukasey nomination...

He sure knows what Congress needs to do....When did he serve in the legislative branch again?

Jeebus I hate agreeing with this petulant fucking worm on anything...but Congress does need to shut up already about the Turks and Armenians...

First question is about the Turks pursuing PKK terrorists across the border into Iraq, where they have safe haven.

Why is he sticking a thumb in China's eye by giving the Dalai Lama an award. About the only thing that made sense in his answer was "I like going to the gold medal ceremonies."

David Gregory wants him to say something about the apparent Israeli-Syria episode, but he ain't commenting...

Now, Putin in Iran, talking tough...What does he think? "Sure there will be a nice picture to send a good message...he wants to talk to Pooty-Poot and see what went on..." He has no answers for this one. Sad to watch, sadder to listen to...

North Korea - he isn't elaborating. "Diplomacy only works when there are consequences if the diplomacy fails..." Consequences, consequences, consequences...Without a trace of irony...

He dissed Martha, and my husband shook his head and called him a "mother fucker."

Iraq..."Can't be won militarily." (No foolin'?) Should the U.S. be prepared for a significant troop presence in Iraq after his term of office expires? He gave a non-answer..."That will be determined by the commanders."

I just gotta rant a sec...I don't give a rat's ass if anyone has a new-que-lar weapon, seein' as how there is no such god-damned thing. I can not take seriously anything he says about nuclear matters when he can't even fucking pronounce it! That verbal affectation is not charming...it's humiliating.

He is droning on about "isolating Iran" while the Russians and Caspian states are cozying up...Sooo...How's that workin' for ya there, George? Iran doesn't look too damned isolated to a whole bunch of us...

How would he assess himself on dealings with the Democrats? We are finding common ground on Iraq, because the Petraeus Promenade was successful...telecoms need immunity for violating our civil liberties...But it's the fault of the Democrats that bills aren't moving.

Now he is lying about SCHIP. Still repeating the $83,000 lie.

Sanchez just came up..."I admire [him], I appreciate his service, the situation...has changed...so I am pleased with the progress we are making and I admire the fact that he served." What a pussified non-answer....

On to Blackwater...They provide a vital service...They have saved lives...(iow: Mercenaries are really good guys! Just misunderstood!)

"What is your definition of 'Torture'?" Glossed over..."That is defined in U.S. law, and we don't torture."

He insists he isn't an irrelevant lame duck, he has never been more vital...

Back to SCHIP and still with the lying. Please, Congress, override this petulant asshole tomorrow...

More "Phony Soldiers" Piping Up

About two months ago, the New York Times published an op-ed from seven infantry NCOs that questioned the wisdom of “staying the course” in Iraq. The piece was damning, and punctuated by the fact that one of the Soldiers was seriously wounded between the time the piece was written and when it was published, and two more of the seven were killed shortly after.

Today, on the fifth anniversary of the congress passing the AUMF, the Washington Post ran an op-ed penned by twelve former Army Captains who served in Iraq, and it is just as damning and just as sweeping. Five years into this mess, the military is over-extended and under-resourced, and the nation of Iraq is in tatters.

As Army captains who served in Baghdad and beyond, we've seen the corruption and the sectarian division. We understand what it's like to be stretched too thin. And we know when it's time to get out.

What does Iraq look like on the ground? It's certainly far from being a modern, self-sustaining country. Many roads, bridges, schools and hospitals are in deplorable condition. Fewer people have access to drinking water or sewage systems than before the war. And Baghdad is averaging less than eight hours of electricity a day.

Iraq's institutional infrastructure, too, is sorely wanting. Even if the Iraqis wanted to work together and accept the national identity foisted upon them in 1920s, the ministries do not have enough trained administrators or technicians to coordinate themselves. At the local level, most communities are still controlled by the same autocratic sheiks that ruled under Saddam. There is no reliable postal system. No effective banking system. No registration system to monitor the population and its needs.

The inability to govern is exacerbated at all levels by widespread corruption. Transparency International ranks Iraq as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. And, indeed, many of us witnessed the exploitation of U.S. tax dollars by Iraqi officials and military officers. Sabotage and graft have had a particularly deleterious impact on Iraq's oil industry, which still fails to produce the revenue that Pentagon war planners hoped would pay for Iraq's reconstruction. Yet holding people accountable has proved difficult. The first commissioner of a panel charged with preventing and investigating corruption resigned last month, citing pressure from the government and threats on his life.

This is the scenario against which the U.S. military is struggling to hold the nation of Iraq together, with too-few troops. Even with the additional 30,000 that the “Surge™” temporarily afforded. There are simply not enough Soldiers and Marines in-country to clear insurgents, hold territory and build sustainable institutions.

…Though temporary reinforcing operations in places like Fallujah, An Najaf, Tal Afar, and now Baghdad may brief well on PowerPoint presentations, in practice they just push insurgents to another spot on the map and often strengthen the insurgents' cause by harassing locals to a point of swayed allegiances. Millions of Iraqis correctly recognize these actions for what they are and vote with their feet -- moving within Iraq or leaving the country entirely. Still, our colonels and generals keep holding on to flawed concepts.

American G.I.’s are tasked with too many objectives and too much battle space. This serves to makes them targets, and sadly, one of the inevitabilities of a protracted withdrawal will be a ratcheting upward of attacks against the occupying forces, the civilian leadership of the nation, and third-party consultants. They will also, without a doubt, be caught in the crossfire of the Iraqi civil war.

Iraq’s security forces will be unable to salvage the situation. Even if they had adequate training, equipment and commitment; with their numbers shy of 350,000 there are too few of them to successfully hold the country together.

Besides that, soldiers in the Iraqi army pretty much leave at will, once the pay envelopes and weapons are passed out; the police are controlled by the militias, the corruption is systemic and the United States taxpayers are equipping and arming the very elements that will fight one another once the American forces inevitably withdraw.

American Generals are laying plans that are contingent on peace breaking out in Iraq, while simultaneously, the Iraqis are preparing for a full-on, salt-the-fields and poison-the-wells civil war.

The Captains close the piece with an uncomfortable truth…There is only one way to sustain an operation like is currently being pursued in Iraq, and that is to bring back the draft. “Short of that, our best option is to leave Iraq immediately. A scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war, and it will spend more blood and treasure on a losing proposition.”

“America, it has been five years. It's time to make a choice.”

Another General Denounces Bush and the Iraq Fiasco

Retired Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez took a swipe at the aWol Bush maladministration and their inept, incompetent and inconsistent management of the occupation of Iraq. The United States is “living a nightmare with no end in sight.” He warned. “After more than fours years of fighting, America continues its desperate struggle in Iraq without any concerted effort to devise a strategy that will achieve victory in that war-torn country or in the greater conflict against extremism.” General Sanchez was speaking to a gathering here of military reporters and editors.

The remarks were made during one of the first public speeches Sanchez has given since leaving the Army late last year. He blamed the administration for launching and mismanaging a “catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan”and he denounced the current “surge™” strategy as a “desperate” move that will fail to establish long-term stability.

General Sanchez is the most senior in a string of retired generals to harshly criticize the administration’s conduct of the war. Asked following his remarks why he waited nearly a year after his retirement to outline his views, he responded that that it was not the place of active duty officers to challenge lawful orders from civilian authorities. General Sanchez, who is said to be considering a book, promised further public statements criticizing officials by name.

“There was been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders,” he said, adding later in his remarks that civilian officials have been “derelict in their duties” and guilty of a “lust for power.”

The White House had no initial comment.

Sanchez is speaking out, in the face of the slime machine, even though he knows full well that he has an Abu Ghraib problem that will make him a target of vicious criticisms and accusations that he is trying to shift blame for his own shortcomings to the poor, hapless president. Although Sanchez was cleared of wrongdoing in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal by an Army investigation, he became a symbol of an occupation that was botched from the get-go.

Look for accusations that he has an axe to grind, that he is seeking revenge against the president who opted not to nominate him for a fourth star and effectively ended his career, forcing him into retirement.

Taking questions from reporters after his presentation, he included the military command structure, himself included, among those who exercised poor judgment and made tragic mistakes in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. He lamented the failure to insist on a post-war stabilization plan.

Still, the bulk of his criticism was directed at the Bush administration and their failures of leadership. He lambasted them for failures to mobilize the entire U.S. government and not just the military in the reconstruction and stabilization efforts in Iraq. “National leadership continues to believe that victory can be achieved by military power alone,” he said. “Continued manipulations and adjustments to our military strategy will not achieve victory. The best we can do with this flawed approach is stave off defeat.”

He accused the administration of failing to craft any kind of strategy that went beyond military force. “The administration, Congress and the entire inter-agency, especially the State Department, must shoulder responsibility for the catastrophic failure, and the American people must hold them accountable,” General Sanchez said.

The Last REAL Democrat in D.C.

The Gentleman on the left is David Obey, Democrat representing the Wisconsin 07.

Take a good long look, folks.

This is what a real Democrat looks like.

Today, I wish I lived in the Wisconsin 07 so I could lay claim to being this man's constituent!

Today, this Congressman is the truest, bluest Democrat in the fold.

Today, Obey took a stand, Nancy and Steney be damned. The Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee announced that until there is a definitive change of course where the unholy clusterfuck of Iraq is concerned, there will be no supplemental spending legislation coming out of committee.

“As chairman of the Appropriations Committee I have absolutely no intention of reporting out of committee anytime in this session of Congress any such request that simply serves to continue the status quo,” Obey told reporters.

He went a step further and advocated a "war tax" to pay the tab, too:

Obey PUTS HOLD
ON BUSH’S $190 Billion WAR SUPPLEMENTAL

Calls for War Surtax so Military Families Don’t Bear Full Burden of Iraq War

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In a press conference today with Congressman John Murtha (D-PA), the Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and Congressman James McGovern (D-MA), the Vice Chairman of the Rules Committee, Seventh District Congressman Dave Obey (D-WI), the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said that he will not take up President Bush’s nearly $200 billion war supplemental request this year; calling the policy behind the President’s request “a dead end policy.”

“The policy outlined by the President is being sold to the country as a plan to reduce our troop levels in Iraq, but it is quite the opposite. When you strip away the fog, it’s simply a plan to get us back six months from now to the same place we were six months ago before the surge began. It is not being undertaken because of any new determination to reduce troop levels. It is simply recognizing that we do not have enough troops to sustain the surge level. It’s a confession that the President has not a clue about how to get us out of that civil war and instead plans to punt the problem to his successor – ruining two administrations rather than just one,” Obey said. “As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I have no intention of reporting out a $200 billion supplemental that will give the President a blank check for an entire fiscal year and I have no intention of acquiescing in a policy that will result in draining the treasury so dry that it will result in the systematic disinvestment of America’s future.”

Obey added that he would be perfectly willing to consider the President’s supplemental request if that request were made in support of a change in policy that would do three things:

1. Establish as a goal the end of U.S. involvement in combat operations by January of 2009.
2. Ensure that troops would have adequate time at home to rest, retrain and re-equip between deployments.
3. Demonstrate a determination to engage in an intensive, broad scale diplomatic offensive involving other countries in the region.

Noting that “we need to stop pretending that this war doesn’t cost anything,” Obey also announced that Murtha, McGovern and he will be introducing a bill to create a war surtax to pay for operations in Iraq instead of passing those costs on to future generations as the President has requested.

“I’m tired of seeing that only military families are asked to sacrifice in this war; and they are asked to sacrifice again, and again, and again, so we are putting together this bill in the hope that people will stop ignoring what this war is costing American taxpayers and call the President's bluff on fiscal responsibility,” Obey said. “The President is threatening to veto our efforts to provide one-tenth the amount of money that he is spending in Iraq for investments in education, health, medical research, science, law enforcement, and other areas that are crucial to creating a stronger country and more prosperous families. If the President is really serious about combating deficit spending then we’d be happy to help him avoid shoving the costs of the war in Iraq on to our kids by providing for a war surtax.”

“If this war is important enough to fight, then it’s important enough to pay for,” Obey concluded.

*************************

A War Tax is a damned good place to start, and I don't care what Speaker Placeholder says. (She is really starting to piss me off with her bullshit, centrist appeasement stance. In fact, she pretty much defines who I have in mind when I bitch that we need better (read REAL) Democrats.)

Hell, throw in the threat of bringing back the draft, too, and we might actually see some fucking progress toward ending George Bush's Vanity War. Progress that even Nancy and Harry wouldn't be able to stop!

Get out your checkbooks

...cause this is gonna cost, and there is no way tax cuts are gonna cover the tab.

Once again, the projected date for Iraqi security forces to take over from the American forces has been pushed further into the future, to at least July of 2007.

And doesn’t that just dovetail beautifully with the recent CBO report on the cost of occupying Iraq, as requested by Senator Kent Conrad?

I read the report.

Make no mistake about it…The cabal in charge right now is setting up the board for an occupation without end in Iraq. To their way of thinking, the only undecided is – will 55,000+ Americans be embroiled in the current combat role? Or will 55,000 be stationed at hardened bases, i.e. the Korea model?

The CBO reports that the former will cost $4-8 Billion up front, and $25 Billion per year thereafter; the latter $8 Billion up front, and about $8 Billion per year thereafter.

In both scenarios, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) bases their projections on the long-term presence of

• A division headquarters
• Four Heavy Brigade Combat Teams (HBCT’s)
• Six Tactical Fighter Squadrons
• 10,000 training personnel

The stage is being set for a Permanent Security Arrangement.

George Bush – who deserted his unit in a time of war – has already decided that we are there forever (or until the oil runs out – whichever comes first) on his whim.

Meantime, the spineless cowards in Congress mewl most pathetically; then fall in line.

If you disagree with the policy of occupying that country for decades; if you disagree with the plan for children not yet born to patrol the same streets that our young men and women are dying on right now, make your voice heard today.

The time is now – this is election season – nail your candidates down – and if they fall in line with perpetual occupation, nail their political careers to a proverbial cross.

The reviews are in, and the Petraeus Production has been resoundingly panned

Yep. They definitely picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

While it is still true that no one ever went broke underestimating the stupidity of the American people…it is also true that the odds shifted slightly in favor of common sense after the Petraeus Promenade™ before Congress.

Gin up the Wurlitzer…this is gonna be all my fault, or at least the fault of my DFH ilk, I just know it…

President Bush's top military and diplomatic advisers in Iraq -- Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker -- came to Washington last week to plead the case that the troop surge is working and that, if the military is given more time to build on the progress, victory is still achievable. The American public, it seems, did not buy the administration's message. A new CBS News poll demonstrates that Americans remain skeptical of the way the war is being waged.

In the survey, 57 percent of respondents claimed to pay at least some attention to Petraeus' testimony before Congress. Considerably fewer (29 percent) said they watched the president's televised speech on Thursday, in which he announced plans to withdraw 30,000 troops by next summer. A possible explanation for their tuning out: About two-thirds said the president tries to make the situation in Iraq sound better than it truly is.

Respondents were unconvinced by Petraeus' argument that the troop surge is improving conditions in Iraq. The number of those in a half-sample who saidthe surge is making no impact or is making things worse shot up 5 points from early September. Of those who said that things are getting better thanks to the surge, a 47-percent plurality acknowledged that they believe the improvements will only last as long as the extra troops are in place.

Who could have imagined? Oh – and I’m shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

Who would have ventured a guess that after four years of just making shit up, that the people would eventually wise up? That the populace would collectively recall the parable of The Boy Who Cried Wolf - and call their bluff?

Nah. Better to blame me (and my DFH brothers and sisters) for salting the fields, poisoning the well and pouring vinegar in the milk. After all, I didn’t even come close to clapping loud enough. I even opined openly that General Dave would arrive in DC slingin’ the shit and singin’ “As the Caissons Go Rollin’ Along.”

So the fact that the number of Americans favoring withdrawal from Iraq is up, from 65% to 68% - that’s on me. I didn’t clap loud enough.

Whatever. That’s cool. I’ll take it. Along with the blame and the wrath of the dead-enders and whack-jobs. They still think we could have won in Vietnam, so they are certifiably fucking insane, and why do we give a good god-damn what the hell these deranged fuckwits think? I’m frankly sick of pandering to these demented assholes. Grow a spine, tell them they are fucking nuts, laugh at them, mock them, hurl over-ripe tomatoes at them, and fart in their general direction. They are literally the lunatic fringe, and it is your civic duty to hound these idiot children off the public stage and into the swamps of the deep, deep south where they can commune with their kinfolk: snakes, reptilian holdovers and various forms of fungi.

No matter what, to those inbred half-wits it’s going to be the fault of the “Libruls" so fuck ‘em. Write 'em off. Tell the loony bastards to piss off, and kiss your ass in the process. They are on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of morality and the wrong side of humanity.

Fuck. Them.

They have been consistently wrong and the filthy whores are not going to suddenly have their virtue restored.

So in the meantime, I’ll take whatever I can get, if it will bring us one step closer to stopping this unholy clusterfuck.

It’s wrong, it has always been wrong, and making it right is impossible. This is coming into focus for the American people.

And at the same time, more than 70% of the country is hearing their grandmother admonish them…You have to get the bull out of the china shop before you can start cleaning up. And as we all know, Grandma knows best.

Iraqi Interior Ministry revokes authority of Blackwater to operate in Iraq

In the wake of a Sunday firefight near Nisoor square in Baghadad that left eight civilians dead and fourteen injured, Iraq's Interior Ministry has revoked the license of Blackwater Security Consulting to operate inside Iraq.

Details are doling out slowly, but witness accounts of the incident reported that one side of the gun battle involved westerners driving sport utility vehicles, of the type used by western contractors; al-Iraqiya, the state-owned television network, reported that a western security company was involved, but did not identify which one.

The firefight erupted after a State Department motorcade came under small-arms fire near Nisoor Square, and one of the vehicles was disabled. No State Department officials were injured, but offered no information on Iraqi casualties.

Today, the Iraqi Interior Ministry took concrete steps to rein in one of the mercenary outfits that infests their country. "We have revoked Blackwater's license to operate in Iraq. As of now they are not allowed to operate anywhere in the Republic of Iraq," Interior Ministry spokesman Brig. Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf said Monday. "The investigation is ongoing, and all those responsible for Sunday's killing will be referred to Iraqi justice."

Blackwater is just one of many *security firms* (when did we stop calling mercenaries by their rightful name?) contracted by the U.S. government during the occupation of Iraq. In fact, the number of employees of these so-called "security" firms outnumbers the coalition forces. Hundreds have lost their lives.

Iraqi officials have complained bitterly about shootings by private military contractors, but Iraqi courts lack the authority to bring contractors to trial or hold them accountable. Additionally, they are not subject to UCMJ, so essentially, a contractor is unaccountable to anyone - a contractor can commit a war crime and the stiffest punishment will be getting tossed out of the country, still a free man. The U.S. military has complained that mercenaries will touch off violence, then call them to clean up the mess.

In February the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform estimated that nearly $4 billion had been paid out to mercenary outfits since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. These costs have forced the delay and cancellation of reconstruction projects.

Stay tuned for further developments. I will be revisiting the issue as details emerge.

Who owns responsibility for the Iraq debacle, exactly?

On Saturday, a Kurdish Iraqi parliamentarian angrily denounced Washington in general and aWol's delusional assertion that life is returning to "ordinary" in Iraq in particular. It's starting to look almost like those Iraqi ingrates kinda take personally the fact that their country has been destroyed by the policies and actions of a reckless poltroon or sumthin.'

"The Americans always try to pretend the responsibility for cleaning up this mess isn't theirs and tend to shift blame onto Iraq, Iran and Syria for everything that goes wrong," said veteran Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman.

"But they should stop this nonsense and admit that most of the accountability rests on their shoulders," he told Reuters.

aWol has been critical of the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kemal al-Maliki for failing to make political progress when the ostensible purpose of surging troops into Baghdad was to give the government "breathing space" to stabilize and achieve goals toward reconciliation.

Of the 18 benchmarks set forth in the supplemental funding legislation that was passed in May, three have been met, and there has been partial progress toward a few of the others, but giving them credit for half is patently dishonest, and frankly, it is a crime to lie to congress.

Lawmakers in Iraq were less than acquiescing toward the slaps that have been taken at them. "Before they ask the government to treat the problems in Iraq they should correct the mistakes they committed, like the disbanding of the Iraqi army," Sunni Arab lawmaker Izzedine al-Dawla said.

The Maliki government has been frozen by infighting and in fact, can not even achieve a quorum of the cabinet to send legislation to the parliament for consideration.

Of course for the Halliburton administration, it is all about the oil. If the Iraqis had passed the Exxon Mobile Enrichment Act, it would be all ponies and donuts and rainbows would fill the sky. But the Iraqis are proving rather reluctant to pony over their resources to western business interests. Go figure and who could have imagined?

Only every last fucking one of us who said "Don't do this, you fucking morons!"

[Mini-rant warning:]

The fact is, responsibility does rest in Washington. The failed neocon experiment has proven to be an unmitigated fucking disaster. If anyone belongs in Guantanamo Bay for terrorist sympathies, it is the war criminals and fascist fuckers who comprise the PNAC (Project for a New American Century) signatories.

Those miserable bastards should have their foreheads branded that they might be identified for all time; they should be held in stocks in the public square for a prolonged period of time with no considerations for weather, they should have overripe produce hurled at them non-stop, and anyone who feels like taking out their aggressions should be able to buy turns with a cat-'o-nine-tails to lash their backs and buttocks. I would empty my 401K and my IRA, and mortgage two houses to buy turns taking pieces of flesh off the back of Bill Kristol alone. I take great sadistic pleasure at the thought of making "Bill the Bloody" a literal description instead of a figurative one - in other words, I favor the spilling of every last drop of his own personal blood, over one more drop of anyone else's in pursuit of his grand, psychotic delusion.

That pathetic little epitome of erectile dysfunction and the people who signed that document are the worst humanity has yet to offer, and they should be treated accordingly, just short of being burned alive.

Make examples of them, damnit, that no one will fuck up like that again.

Haven't you just had it with these know-it-all idiots who actually know nothing?

Or is it just me?

Sadr Bloc Withdraws From Iraqi Government

The political faction loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr has withdrawn from the Iraqi government, depriving the coalition assembled by Nuri Kemal al-Maliki of 30 votes in parliament. Today's decision was announced at a press conference in the holy city of Najaf, and comes five months after the Sadrist faction of the cabinet withdrew.

The Sadrists have long complained that Prime Minister al-Maliki has ignored their concerns and failed to include them in the decision making process. One major point of contention between the Sadrists and Maliki has been their insistence on a timeline for the withdrawal of American forces, and Maliki's steadfast refusal to incorporate them. The Sadrist faction has also been extremely critical of re-Baatification efforts.

Although the withdrawal of the Sadrists is not likely to bring down the government, the move is significant because Maliki became prime Minister only with the support of Muqtada al-Sadr and his followers.

No official reason for the withdrawal has been given, but it seems something of a given that al-Sadr is eager to distance himself from a government that is so close to the Americans that some call it a puppet. The movement issued a brief statement proclaiming that "The political committee has declared the withdrawal of the Sadr bloc from the alliance because there was no visible indication that the demands of Sadr's bloc were being met." There was no further elaboration.

To even the casual observer, it is starting to look like aWol and his minions picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

Reviving the Webb Amendment

Frustrated by their inability to affect any real change in the nations Iraq policy with their razor-thin majorities, the Democrats in the Senate are resurrecting the Webb Amendment, which would mandate that dwell-time at least equal time deployed. Currently, the Army deploys for 15 months of combat and 12 months at their permanent post.

Some soldiers, those that transfer from one unit to another have seen even that time cut short when the new unit rotates back. The Webb Amendment would require individual soldiers be considered and those soldiers not be redeployed until they had been out of theater for a year.

The Webb Amendment would force a draw down of force strength by putting protections in place that would put a stop to the abusive rotations that never allow soldiers time to adapt and reacclimate and remember how to live.

Of course, Secretary of Defense Bob Gates responded that it might mean even lengthier tours.

Mr. Gates called the proposal “well-intentioned,” but said it might require extending tours of units already in Iraq, calling up additional National Guard and Reserve troops, and making other adjustments that “would further stress the force and reduce its combat effectiveness.”

“The complexity of managing the flow of units, individuals and capabilities to two active combat theaters is enormous and does not lend itself to simplistic, or to simple, legislative prescriptions,” Mr. Gates said at a briefing with Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “The cumulative effect of these kinds of things, we think, would, frankly, increase the risk to our men and women in uniform over there.”

I would suggest that the Democrats call his bluff, and make it clear from Jump Street that should he extend tours further, the public will get their impeachment jones satisfied and he will be the one on trial in the Senate.

We know what strategy the idiot in the oval has decided on...he plans to run out the clock and pass the Iraq debacle off to the next Democratic president. The Democrats and sane Republicans in Congress need to stand up now and get a handle on the situation, if they expect their own political careers to outlive the Bush maladministration.

Anbar Aflame

Just days ago, the White House made much hay out of an alliance with the shadiest sheik of them all, Abu Risha, who could not even conceal his contempt for the vacuous moron for the cameras.

Today, Abu Risha is dead, killed by a powerful IED that destroyed his armored SUV as he left his compound. Four body guards were also killed by the blast. No group has yet laid claim to the attack.

Before the keening and wailing starts, Abu Risha was a thug and a highway bandit, and a list of people who would have wanted him dead would not be a short one. He was unpopular even among other Sunnis, having a reputation for corruption and pettiness that was near unrivaled (making him an ideal ally for aWol, when one thinks about it that way...) He was building a militia that was loyal not to the government, but to him. Reliance on people like him is why the so-called "Anbar Awakening" is pure unadulterated bullshit.

In President George W. Bush's trip last week to Iraq, he visited Anbar rather than Baghdad and forcefully directed attention at the security gains the growing alliance between American and tribal forces had brought. Sheik Abdul Sattar was among the tribal leaders who met with him Sept. 3 at Al Asad Air Base in Anbar, the AP reported. He was the latest and most significant of sheiks leading that effort to be killed, and his death comes as Bush prepares to discuss his Iraq strategy in a nationwide address this evening.

Recently the council had begun to reach out to other tribes to bring them into working with the American and Iraqi government, and had met recently with southern Shia tribes.

His death could be a significant setback for American efforts to work more closely with local tribes against Al Qaeda.

The authorities imposed a state of emergency in Anbar Province following his assassination, police officials said. At least one other person escorting him was also killed in the explosion.

"This action makes a crack and makes it a mess for all those who wanted to be aligned with him," Salim al-Jubori, a spokesman for the largest Sunni Arab block in the Iraqi Parliament, said. "I believe there are other leaders who will take this on, but this is not easy."

Word of the attack comes just hours before the Resident addresses the nation tonight, in a last-ditch effort to gain support for his failed Iraqi adventure, that has thus far cost nearly a trillion dollars and is closing in on 3800 American lives.

Scratch the oil law, it ain't gonna happen

The timing on this simply could not be worse.

This might have kept aWol awake, tossing and turning until 9:30 - possibly even 9:45.

The legislative process covering the Exxon-Mobile Enrichment Act Iraqi oil sharing law has finally, officially, collapsed. The oil law represented the last straw that the Bush administration had hope of grasping onto as Iraq slips away; and aWol’s position as Most. Pathetic. Excuse. For. A. Human. Being. Ever. is secured for time immemorial.

At the very moment in time that it is crucial to exhibit evidence of reconciliation, the flagship legislation fails. The collapse comes in the wake of conflict between Hussain al-Shahristani, the Iraqi oil minister, and officials of the provincial government in the Kurdish north, where some of the nation’s largest fields are located.

I’m sure that the Kurds deciding to begin signing contracts with international oil companies before the law was passed had nothing to do with that conflict…

I’m sure that the decision by the Kurdish authorities last week to enter into an oil exploration contract with Hunt Oil Company of Dallas (the same Hunt family that owns the Kansas City Chiefs) had no bearing at all on the breakdown of the legislation. Of course not…

The language of the law was hammered out in February, but it has been unable to move forward through parliament ever since. This final collapse comes just as the American occupying power is desperately looking for any thing that can be latched onto as representing progress to parade before congress as the battle for funding the war for next year ramps up.

But instead of resolution, what we have at hand is dissolution.

The Sunni Arabs who removed their support for the deal did so, in part, because of a contract the Kurdish government signed earlier with a company based in the United Arab Emirates, Dana Gas, to develop gas reserves.

The Kurds say their regional law is consistent with the Iraqi Constitution, which grants substantial powers to the provinces to govern their own affairs. But Mr. Shahristani believes that a sort of Kurdish declaration of independence can be read into the move. “This to us indicates very serious lack of cooperation that makes many people wonder if they are really going to be working within the framework of the federal law,” Mr. Shahristani said in a recent interview, before the Hunt deal was announced.

Kurdish officials dispute that contention, saying that they are doing their best to work within the Constitution while waiting for the Iraqi Parliament, which always seems to move at a glacial pace, to consider the legislation.

“We reject what some parties say — that it is a step towards separation — because we have drafted the Kurdistan oil law depending on Article 111 of the Iraqi Constitution, which says oil and natural resources are properties of Iraqi people,” said Jamal Abdullah, a spokesman for the Kurdistan Regional Government. “Both Iraqi and Kurdish oil laws depend on that article,” Mr.

The Prime Ministers office, however, sees a simpler – and darker – reason for the Sunnis withholding their support. In Maliki-world, his opponents would rather betray the nation than give him a political victory. “I think there is a political reason behind that delay in order not to see the Iraqi government achieve the real agreement,” said a political adviser to Mr. Maliki.

Yes, I’m sure that’s it. In fact, I’m absolutely certain that that is absolutely all there is to it. It couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the de facto secession of Kurdistan, and the loss of the largest oil reserves in the country formerly known as Iraq.

But think about it this way – if Americans are willing to go halfway around the world and fight a war for access to those oilfields - does anyone in their right mind think that those who feel wronged, and who happen to be in the neighborhood, are going to let it go without a fight?

Parsing the Petraeus Promenade™

For two days they appeared before open congressional committee meetings, answering questions from the legislative branch. Five of the members they faced are running for the presidency, and one of the inquisitors today will likely be the commander in chief they will answer to come January 2009. Another Senator was the opponent Petraeus sided against in 2004. That Senator did not bring up the infamous op-ed, but Senator Boxer did.

On balance, Tuesday was certainly not Monday. The man-crushes were, for the most part, kept in check - unlike Monday, when I feared that some of the overt, gushing, adoration would get the General in trouble under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

There were significant moments in the testimony Tuesday. Petraeus went on the congressional record that there was no connection between the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and Saddam Hussein. When pressed, he could not say that America’s involvement in Iraq makes Americans safer.

But there was one question that Petraeus either could not – or would not – answer. It was the one he asked in 2003 as the invasion ramped up. “How does this end?”

"Are we going to continue to invest American blood and treasure at the same rate we are doing now, for what? The president said let's buy time. Buy time? For what?" said Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., a Vietnam veteran who also will retire next year.

Most experts argue that stabilizing Iraq requires two things above all: political reconciliation among Shiite Muslims, Sunnis and Kurds, and Iraqi security forces that can stand on their own.

Petraeus and Crocker could promise neither.

As the day wore on, the unspoken consensus emerged that, yeah, George Bush really is a phenomenal fuckwit. And boy, did he ever screw the pooch when he charged headlong into this mess, and it should never have been done, and can’t be undone…All he can do is punt it to the next president and then start trying to cast blame. The men who were sitting in front of congress the last two days are, unenviably, charged with salvaging something from it.

By the end of the day, the testimony made it clear that there will still be a hundred thousand American G.I.’s in Iraq when Bush abdicates to Paraguay on 19 January 2009. And the war in Iraq had been moved front and center in the 2008 election campaign.

Starting today, it's a whole new campaign...

Some Questions for General Petraeus

Ever since the Surge™ plans rolled off the presses at the American Enterprise Institute and the escalation got underway, any time anyone has brought up withdrawal of troops and drawing down in Iraq, Resident Evil™ and his slavering lackeys have engaged in a stall tactic. “Wait for September.” is the rote refrain. “Wait to hear what General Petraeus has to say.” Well, it's September.

(As if we could count on receiving the unvarnished truth about success on the ground! Ha! I inwardly roll my eyes. I’ve read that op-ed before – right before the last presidential selection, in fact.)

Well, we know he is going to spin and mince and parse and do a soft-soap routine extraordinaire. None the less, when he is in front of the congressional committees, I would dearly love to see him asked to answer the following questions – and for the committees to make him answer them in a forthright manner.

Start at the beginning.

General Petraeus, could you start by defining the mission of the U.S. military in Iraq? How does that correspond with the original grounds for the invasion?

What was the population of Iraq in March 2003? What was the unemployment rate? GNP?

What is the population now? Unemployment rate? GNP?

How many Iraqis have fled the country as refugees? How many people have fled violence in their neighborhoods and home districts, but remain in the country as internally displaced persons? How many internal refugee camps have sprung up in recent months?

Of the population remaining in Iraq, how many would you estimate are actively involved with violence toward other Iraqis? Toward American troops?

Would you provide the names of and background on groups which the U.S. maintains have engaged in violence against Americans?

al Qaeda in Iraq

Of the jihadist/resistance fighters in Iraq, how many claim an affiliation with al Qaeda? How many are members of the main al Qaeda organization, and would take direct orders from ObL? Of those claiming membership in AQI, how many are Iraqis? How many are foreign nationals? Of the foreign nationals, where do they come from? How many jihadist fighters do you estimate come from each of these other nations? How many were loyal to al Qaeda before the United States invaded Iraq? Can you provide names and background information on those claiming to be AQI leadership? Are any of the professed leaders Iraqi? How many? How many people in Iraq professed membership in or allegiance to al Qaeda in March 2003.

The Insurgency

Can you provide the statistics on insurgents by sect? Can you give us this information for each province? Of the insurgents in Iraq today, how many have been active since the invasion? How many have taken up arms since the bombing of the al-Askiri Shrine in February 2006? What provinces have seen attacks committed against American forces since the “Surge™” achieved >50% of the troop buildup. What provinces have been violence free in this time period?

Iraqi Casualties

How does the U.S. count Iraqis killed by gunshots? How are Iraqis killed by explosions counted? How are Iraqis killed by American air strikes counted? Do you feel the slightest pang of conscience when you parse death statistics by whether a victim died execution style, or facing their killer? Do you think that matters to the decedent or their family?

Iraqi Perceptions

How many Iraqis oppose continuing the American military presence in that country? Of Iraqis not engaged in violence against Americans, how many nonetheless do not object to attacks against American forces?

The Missing Millions

How much cash was airlifted to Iraq after the invasion of 2003? We know that at least $110 million went missing from your command in Mosul. What happened to that money, General? How much of that missing money has been used to fund the insurgency, either directly or indirectly?

The Missing Weapons

We know that fully half of American casualties in Iraq are the result of the failure to secure munitions (al Qua Qua) in the early days of the invasion. Were you in any way responsible for the decisions that led to that failure? Who was? Have they faced any accountability?

The GAO estimates that approximately half of all light weapons supplied by American forces to Iraqi military and police forces – 190,000 AK-47’s and handguns – have gone missing. Who got those weapons? Have they been turned against American forces? Used against other Iraqis in sectarian attacks? Used in criminal acts?

Infrastructure

How many bridges have been attacked since the troop buildup got underway?

How many hours of electricity does the average Iraqi experience in a day? What was the average before the invasion in March 2003? What was the average temperature in Iraq this August? How do Iraqis cool their homes? How many times has the electrical grid been attacked by insurgents since the start of the escalation? Who is responsible for the security of the grid? How many hours of electricity does your headquarters enjoy per day?

How many Iraqi homes, on average went without water for more than 24 hours during the month of August? What is the status of the water delivery system? How safe is the water to drink, when it is available? Hypothetically: If your family came to visit you in Iraq, would you feel comfortable with them drinking the water?

***

And then, after a brief restroom break, I would start asking even tougher questions about the status of the Iraqi security forces. And I would segue into the ten and twenty year occupation predictions and projections. But that is me – and I am not a lily-livered poltroon afraid of being perceived as being mean to a poor little helpless four-star general.

(Hat tip to one of the commenters at Political Animal for posting many of these same questions, and many more. Reading that comment, I was able to pull all the disparate strands of outrage together and write a post that passes for cogent.)

The great unraveling is under way

When sharks smell blood in the water, it matters not that the wounded is one of their own. They tear the unfortunate creature to bits anyway. The Bush maladministration is experiencing a similar phenomenon.

Dead Certain, the new book by GQ reporter Robert Draper is a withering indictment of the inner workings of a White House suffering from 'Mad Cowboy Disease.' One of the revelations in the pages, is the denial by the Resident that he was "in on" the disbanding of the Iraqi military forces. He disavows all knowledge of the decision-making process, and actually takes a page from Fredo's book - actually saying he "doesn't remember" the decision being made or even any discussion about it. “The policy had been to keep the army intact; didn’t happen,” Mr. Bush told the interviewer. When the president was asked how he had reacted when he learned that the policy was being reversed, Mr. Bush replied, “Yeah, I can’t remember, I’m sure I said, “This is the policy, what happened?’ ”

Seriously - he wants one and all to believe that Paul Bremer's acted unilaterally in the creation of a well-armed and well-trained insurgency that was at the ready to commence a guerrilla war against the occupying invaders in the wake of the dissolution.

One little hitch in that get-along. Bremer archived the correspondence, and provided it to the New York Times. (As if we needed more proof that Bush is a god-damned liar and unfit to serve you lunch, let alone as chief executive and commander in chief of the most powerful military the planet has ever seen.)

“We must make it clear to everyone that we mean business: that Saddam and the Baathists are finished,” Mr. Bremer wrote in a letter that was drafted on May 20, 2003, and sent to the president on May 22 through Donald H. Rumsfeld, then secretary of defense.

After recounting American efforts to remove members of the Baath Party of Saddam Hussein from civilian agencies, Mr. Bremer told Mr. Bush that he would “parallel this step with an even more robust measure” to dismantle the Iraq military.

One day later, Mr. Bush wrote back a short thank you letter. “Your leadership is apparent,” the president wrote. “You have quickly made a positive and significant impact. You have my full support and confidence.”

Mr. Bremer appears to be at the end of a slow-burn over administration current and former officials backing away from the decision to disband the military like they have just caught whif of a skunk. “This didn’t just pop out of my head,” he said in a telephone interview on Monday, adding that he had sent a draft of the order to top Pentagon officials and discussed it “several times” with Mr. Rumsfeld. Bremer is making it abundantly clear that he is pissed off unhappy about being portrayed as a loose cannon by various and sundry former administration officials.

Bremer said that he widely distributed a draft of the proposed order throughout the administration and the Pentagon. Among those who received a copy were disgraced World Bank President

Mr. Bremer said he sent a draft of the proposed order on May 9, shortly before he departed for his new post in Baghdad, to Mr. Rumsfeld and other top Pentagon officials.

Among others who received the draft order, he said, were Paul D. Wolfowitz, then the deputy secretary of defense; Doug "stupidest fucker in the world" Feith, then under secretary of defense for policy; Lt. Gen. David D. McKiernan, then head of the American-led coalition forces in Iraq; and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Bremer also maintains that Rumsfeld was briefed multiple times in the plan, and British military officials were briefed as well. The Joint Chiefs responded with great detail, removing any doubt that they understood the proposal.

What is emerging is a picture of a White House that has been in disarray and beset by infighting from the earliest days. Some days I feel like I am watching four-year olds "play government" and other days I feel like I am helplessly looking on in horror as drunken monkeys play with loaded handguns.

UPDATE: The comment thread was deleted at 10:30. I was not comfortable with the content of the thread. This is a blog of reality-based political commentary, therefore I admit to a leftward slant, as I state in the title of the blog. But activism on this site is limited to the endorsements in the sidebar, and I had a feeling that a cause was being taken up, and that is not what this place is for.

This place is for giving you some of the information you need so you can decide for yourself what causes you want to take up.

Reid offers an olive branch to anti-war Republicans

Accepting the contentious nature of the debate ahead over the approaching weeks, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has acquiesced on the “date certain” provision of upcoming legislation in an effort to build an alliance with a small-but-growing contingent of anti-war Republican lawmakers in an effort to find ways to draw down the occupation of Iraq. .

He acknowledged that his previous insistence on a withdrawal deadline had presented an insurmountable obstacle for many Republicans who have said they oppose continued involvement but who were unwilling to commit to timetables.

"I don't think we have to think that our way is the only way," Reid said of specific dates during an interview in his office here. "I'm not saying, 'Republicans, do what we want to do.' Just give me something that you think you would like to do, that accomplishes some or all of what I want to do."

Reid's unwavering stance this summer earned him critics who said he was playing politics by refusing to bargain with antiwar Republicans. In the interview, he said that his goal remains an immediate return of U.S. troops but that now is the time to work with the GOP. He cited bringing up legislation after Labor Day that would require troops to have more home leave, forcing military leaders to reduce troop levels, a measure that has drawn some Republican support.

On September 4, Congress returns from the August recess, facing an angry electorate and a desperate executive. The coming week will see the congress take the initiative on the assessment of the situation in Iraq by opening hearings into a GAO report that will be released Tuesday, and by taking up the issues raised by the report of another Blue Ribbon panel. The following week, Petraeus will bring his particularly insidious brand of spin to the Hill, where he will appeal for more time, blood and treasure to pour into the sand of Iraq.

After the Parade of the Viziers is done, and the Resident makes his own report, the debate will begin anew.

That debate screeched to a halt after the fake filibuster in July. All that stunt managed to do was piss everyone off, Republican and Democrat alike. The Republicans successfully blocked the withdrawal measure, because the advocates for withdrawal were unable to reach cloture and pass the legislation with only four Republican votes.

Reid wisely dropped the war debate after that, and attempted to shift the focus to the obstructionism of the Republicans.

This tactic gave the White House a toehold, and they set about building the case that the ridiculously-named “Surge™” strategy is working, in spite of all evidence to the contrary.

"I don't think we had any choice," Reid said, shrugging off past skirmishes. "I have no regrets about the way that I have tried to marshal the troops. It's been hard to keep all the Democrats together, but we've done that."

But looking forward, Reid said he will encourage new coalitions to develop, with a more bipartisan hue. "There is no reason that this be Democrat versus Republican," he said. But his GOP colleagues, he added, must be willing to stand up to Bush, as few have so far. "All these people saying September is here, September is the time -- they're going to have belly up to the bar and decide how to vote," Reid said.

Sen. Jack Reed, a close senate ally of Harry Reid on Iraq policy was circumspect. He noted that with every shift in the Iraq debate, "we've picked up more votes." But he quickly added that meeting the Democrats' ultimate goal of ending the war, well, "There's only so many things you can do."

One of the pieces of failed legislation that Reid will dust off will be the proposal by Sen. James Webb that would mandate that troops deployed to a combat zone get an equal or greater amount of dwell time after their rotation before being redeployed back to combat. This would not set withdrawal dates, but it would effectively curtail troop levels. When the issue came up for a vote earlier in the summer, it received 56 yes votes, but, again, obstructionist Republicans had invoked cloture, which requires 60 votes. Worth noting: Seven Republicans voted yes on the proposal last time, and Senator Johnson is returning to the Senate in September.

The month of September appears to be shaping up to be everything it was billed and more. It seems like every one of 535 congresscritters went to Iraq this month. It wasn’t all of 'em, of course, but it was eight sold out shows a week all month long in every house. Some fell victim to the Green Zone Fog.

Also worth considering is legislation offered by Senators Ken Salazar and Lamar Alexander that would make the recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group into official U.S. policy. The ISG, which was mostly ignored by the Bush administration, included defining specific roles for combat forces and far greater diplomatic initiatives, especially diplomatic initiatives involving the neighboring states. Under the Salazar/ISG legislation, if progress failed to occur, withdrawal would begin early next year. The Salazar-Alexander Bill has attracted 12 additional co-sponsors, at least half of them Republicans. "I respect that some Democrats want us out tomorrow, and some Republicans want a victory like Germany and Japan, but that's not going to happen," Alexander said. But he warned that, given the onset of the 2008 presidential campaign season, "September may be our last best chance" to force a legislative solution.

Re-election season is indeed upon us. All 435 house seats and 34 Senate seats are up this election cycle, and every last one of them will have to answer tough questions about Iraq, posed by an angry electorate. Brian Baird found out just how popular war support is at home. The bloodletting for 2008 is going to commence early. We only thought 2006 was contentious - 2008 is going to be absolutely brutal. It certainly isn't going to be politics for the faint of heart. I hope they are rested up, because the days on the other side of the weekend are going to be grueling (I myself have been on a training regimen for weeks in preparation).