Brits Drawing Down in Iraq?

George Bush stubbornly forges on with his wacky scheme to stabilize a country of 26 million who all want us gone with an additional 21,500 troops; refusing to acknowledge the opposition in congress, the opposition by the American people, the dissension in the ranks or to even the fact that he was rebuked in an election a mere two months ago.

It's a shell-game really. Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the quietest months have been the first 1/2 Friedman Unit, so when they say "We'll know in a couple of months whether it's working." you know damned good and well they are looking at those stats and playing the timing angle, trying to capitalize on anything they can grasp onto.

But it gets better than mere mendacity on the part of the Bush administration. While we are escalating, the Brits are ginning up to draw down.

If Bush goes ahead with a troop buildup in Iraq, with some of those troops culled from the fight in Afghanistan, here is what I I fear happening:

• The Harper Government falls in Canada and the next government will withdraw from the NATO effort in Afghanistan.
• The British start withdrawing from Iraq, leaving the United States to pretty much go it alone in major combat operations.
• The number of Americans killed in battle will rise to 150-200 per month. I hope it doesn't go higher.
• Within 30 days of escalated conflict, a unit will get cut off in Sadr City and be lost. It will be the Blackhawk Down moment we have been fearing.

That's just some of what I see coming out of the Dionysian little moron's grand scheme for escalation of hostilities. I hope like hell I'm wrong, but I am pessimistic. Nothing these jackals have suggested thus far has worked. I see no sense to trust them again. In fact, I would prefer to see the lot of them in a dock at The Hague, standing trial for war crimes.

For Those Keeping Score at Home...

We have had no shortage of new strategies for Iraq. The casting about wildly has been going on for quite some time.

Who remembers Operation Together Forward, rolled out on 09 June 2006? Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced that in an effort to quell violence in Baghdad they would employ checkpoints and a curfew that kept Iraqis indoors from 9:00 pm to 6:00 am...I repeat...In June...In Baghdad...with spotty electric at best.

The result was not decreased violence. The plan failed utterly and completely. By the end of July, it was abandoned.

On July 25, 2007 Bush and Maliki announced that 4000 troops would be repositioned to Baghdad from other areas of the country. This action does nothing to quell the violence in Baghdad, and violence flared in the areas where troops had been pulled out. This led to Senator McCain's famous Whack-a-Mole remark.

Operation Together Forward II was introduced the first week of August. Joint teams of Iraqi and American soldiers began clearing neighborhoods, house-to-house. Areas that had been cleared were to be handed over to Iraqi police.

This nag barely made the first turn. The Iraqis had committed to provide six battalions, but only produced two. Areas that were "cleared" of insurgents and handed over to the Iraqi police did not stay cleared or secure past sundown of the second day. By late October, the U.S. military command in Iraq formally affixed the stamp of failure.

And now he comes before us and tells us he has ordered a futile troop buildup.

This president has been absolutely wrong about absolutely everything up to this point. What, pray tell, exists in his record that would imply he has any prayer of ever having a clue? Let alone the wisdom to extract our country from this clusterfuck?

BIDEN OPPOSES TROOP BUILDUP

"Mr. President, this is your war." --Sen. Joseph Biden

Senator Joseph Biden, Democrat of Delaware, and incoming chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee has stated unequivocally that he opposes any escallation or troop buildups that would insert 20-30,000 additional troops into Baghdad.

This places him firmly at odds with fellow 2008 presidential hopeful, Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona, who was one of the first to call for an escallation of troop numbers to try to quell the sectarian violence in Baghdad. The country would appear to be on Senator Biden's side, given that only 11% of Americans favor such a buildup.

"Absent some profound political announcement . . . I can't imagine there being an overwhelming, even significant support for the president's position," he told reporters during a telephone conference call Tuesday.

If the violence continues two years from now, "every one of those Republican senators — and there's 21 of them up for re- election — knows that that is likely to spell his or her doom," Biden said.

Senator Biden has already informed Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice that she appear before his committee to answer questions about the President's "new and improved" Iraq war plan as soon as it is announced next month. The Secretary has agreed.

I am glad to see Biden taking this stand, vowing to take on this fight, but then I am always glad to see Democrats show signs of spinal fortification.

What we had on November 7 was not just an election - it was an intervention. And like so many addicts, the president charmed his way out the door with words of contrition, and ten minutes later he was back on the streets, trying to score more and more powerful drugs.

"Choosing Victory"

I think it's behind curtain number three, Monty.

I realize Halloween was nearly two months ago, but the president's "way forward" is really some scary stuff. The kind of scary that makes you hear Mahler in the background. Stay the course...hmmm...let's call it Choosing Victory instead. (Like we chose this clusterfuck?)

Choosing Victory is the document that started this whole nonsense business of talking about a troop build-up. The report was compiled by Frederick Kagan, a wingnut of the first order who sees this as a Napoleonic struggle.

Of course, he assumes a lot. First, he assumes that the Shia militias will be so pleased with the additional American troops that they will cease fighting. Second, he assumes that the Sunni insurgents will be defeated by emboldened (embiggened?) Iraqi security forces and will radiate out from Baghdad like a pebble tossed into a pond. Third, he assumes that the additional troops to deploy are readilly available, when in reality assembling, training and equipping takes time.

All overtures to diplomacy and dialogue as recommended by the Iraq Study Group are dismissed out of hand as soft-headed and well, just silly. Kagan insists that there is still a military option in Iraq and that option has a name -- "victory." (How this will be achieved is not addressed). If I were a lawyer I would be screaming "Objection! Assertion not in evidence!"

"Victory is still an option in Iraq," it states. "America, a country of 300 million people with a GDP of $12 trillion, and more than 1 million soldiers and marines can regain control of Iraq, a state the size of California with a population of 25 million and a GDP under $100 billion."

This left me shaking my head with double-secret incredulity. First incredulous assertion: By that measure, we won in Viet nam. Hell, we didn't even have to go in...France won in Viet Nam. Second incredulous assertion: We have more ipods! Therefore we will win!

Seriously, where did they find these guys? Belleview?

It would be funny if nearly a hundred kids a month weren't dying in Iraq because of lies this president told.

And military strategy developed by people who last put on a uniform in cub-scouts is just fucking tragic.