The long awaited report by general Petraeus is in. This is the report Bush said he would abide by and do whatever the general advised. Congress agreed to wait for the September report and in so doing fell for another Bush trick to buy himself MORE TIME IN IRAQ.
Did you really think Petraeus would report something that the president did not want to hear? He said we need to stay till next summer and then review the situation. Is this another trick for MORE TIME IN IRAQ? I think so and this will go on until Bush leaves office and the poor Democratic president that will replace him will be blamed for the disaster in Iraq after he has to pull the troops out because the situation has gotten worst.
I cannot believe we are having this absurd conversation.
Petraeus said that the “Surge” is working because “attacks” are down slightly. Shit, you can have a U.S. soldier in every house in Baghdad and the attacks will go to zero BUT WHAT IN THE HELL HAVE YOU ACCOMPLISHED WITH THAT? That is not a military victory; as soon as the U.S. soldier leaves the house, the attacks will resume – you have not solved a damn thing.
Petraeus was asked if all this action in Iraq is making the United States safer, he said he did not know; that is not his job to know. His job is to reduce the violence in Baghdad and he has done that but on the other hand, we are losing more American soldiers than we ever had, but his mission was not to reduce American casualties just the violence in Baghdad.
Congress wanted a troop withdrawal; Petraeus said he will order a troop withdrawal right away but it is a pittance and only involves the EXTRA troops called up for the “Surge”. By next summer he may be down to 130,000 from the current 160,000 but that is getting back to the original number of troops before the “Surge” so in fact, he has not reduced the number of troops at all; this is all spin or bullshit however you want to characterize this.
President Bush will speak to the nation tomorrow night and he will say that he is taking general Petraeus’ advice and gradually reducing troop levels to possibly pre-surge levels by next summer; see I am doing what I said I would do.
Since a military victory in Iraq is impossible, what about political progress, you know, making Iraq into a democratic and free country? U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker hemmed and hawed but had to admit that progress is ZERO and maybe things have gotten worst AFTER ALL THESE FUCKING YEARS AND ALL THOSE AMERICAN LIVES?
Petraeus and Crocker were asked if after a year from now, there is no political progress; what will they do. They said that looking that far ahead is not wise or realistic – somebody slap these assholes – please!
Some of my friends expressed their desire to see a victory with honor for the U.S. in Iraq and not have another Vietnam. They believe that a victory was possible in Vietnam. I agree that a MILITARY victory was possible in Vietnam; we could have bombed the shit out of North Vietnam, napalmed the whole country, killed every Vietcong hiding in his underground tunnel and lost another 50,000 U.S. soldiers doing that BUT WE WOULD STILL NOT HAVE HAD A POLITICAL VICTORY.
Did you really think Petraeus would report something that the president did not want to hear? He said we need to stay till next summer and then review the situation. Is this another trick for MORE TIME IN IRAQ? I think so and this will go on until Bush leaves office and the poor Democratic president that will replace him will be blamed for the disaster in Iraq after he has to pull the troops out because the situation has gotten worst.
I cannot believe we are having this absurd conversation.
Petraeus said that the “Surge” is working because “attacks” are down slightly. Shit, you can have a U.S. soldier in every house in Baghdad and the attacks will go to zero BUT WHAT IN THE HELL HAVE YOU ACCOMPLISHED WITH THAT? That is not a military victory; as soon as the U.S. soldier leaves the house, the attacks will resume – you have not solved a damn thing.
Petraeus was asked if all this action in Iraq is making the United States safer, he said he did not know; that is not his job to know. His job is to reduce the violence in Baghdad and he has done that but on the other hand, we are losing more American soldiers than we ever had, but his mission was not to reduce American casualties just the violence in Baghdad.
Congress wanted a troop withdrawal; Petraeus said he will order a troop withdrawal right away but it is a pittance and only involves the EXTRA troops called up for the “Surge”. By next summer he may be down to 130,000 from the current 160,000 but that is getting back to the original number of troops before the “Surge” so in fact, he has not reduced the number of troops at all; this is all spin or bullshit however you want to characterize this.
President Bush will speak to the nation tomorrow night and he will say that he is taking general Petraeus’ advice and gradually reducing troop levels to possibly pre-surge levels by next summer; see I am doing what I said I would do.
Since a military victory in Iraq is impossible, what about political progress, you know, making Iraq into a democratic and free country? U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker hemmed and hawed but had to admit that progress is ZERO and maybe things have gotten worst AFTER ALL THESE FUCKING YEARS AND ALL THOSE AMERICAN LIVES?
Petraeus and Crocker were asked if after a year from now, there is no political progress; what will they do. They said that looking that far ahead is not wise or realistic – somebody slap these assholes – please!
Some of my friends expressed their desire to see a victory with honor for the U.S. in Iraq and not have another Vietnam. They believe that a victory was possible in Vietnam. I agree that a MILITARY victory was possible in Vietnam; we could have bombed the shit out of North Vietnam, napalmed the whole country, killed every Vietcong hiding in his underground tunnel and lost another 50,000 U.S. soldiers doing that BUT WE WOULD STILL NOT HAVE HAD A POLITICAL VICTORY.
We would still be in Vietnam today because you cannot be in the middle of a civil war and expect to somehow win because it is NOT OUR WAR!
The same applies to Iraq. We are in the middle of a civil war and therefore a MILITARY VICTORY IS IMPOSSIBLE as is painfully clear to anyone with half a brain.
A political victory as envisioned by Bush is also impossible as evidenced by a civil war in progress; one side has to win and dominate the other side, that is how civil wars work – look it up!
The only possible semblance of a “victory” is to split the country into sectors and let them govern themselves. Oil revenues would be distributed on a per capita basis by a central agency under our control.
In time, these sectors or new countries could reach a level of success as shown by Kurdistan in the north of Iraq. They have peace and are putting up shopping malls. Hey, these small countries may eventually become somewhat democratic; who knows.
Unfortunately, the U.S. would have to maintain a presence for quite some time there. Currently we are building a base on the Iran / Iraq border and the soldiers at that base would be charged with keeping any foreign power, Iran in particular, out of Iraq but hey, the killing would stop!
I am afraid that is as close to a “victory” as we can come. Part of our victory would be to undo the terrible damage we have already done to the people there. If we do for them what we did for Japan after WWII, we may have made up some for the grievous sin we committed by invading them in the first place.
If we want this whole nightmare to end well we better start making our voices heard. Bush is not going to hear them; he is deaf and dumb, but Democrats and Republicans that want our votes in 2008 should be made to listen to us!
Note: Senator McCain continue to make a total fool and jackass out of himself by supporting all the war bullshit coming out of the White House – get out of the race now, you are starting to be a pain in the collective ass of the American people and you are also embarrassing to even listen to.
No comments:
Post a Comment