"Pointless," this war has never been, although the rationales given have yet to be truthful. Too bad the IHT is unwilling to call the war what it is -- a blatant colonial war of aggression for the control of resources no different from those of Japan and Germany in WW2.

"If ever there were a moment for serious discussion about the Iraq war, this is it."

Uh, no. That would have been in 2003, before we invaded. Now we are stuck, we will not leave Iraq, we will continue to sink into the quicksand while grasping for the mirage of military victory.

There is no easy way out, and daddy can't help him now. Bush can only surge, surge, surge. Expect further escalation before year's end.

This editorial is pointless. "serious and honest debate"? With whom, Cheney? Rumsfeld? Feith? Wolfowitz? Perle? Oh, yeah, and let's get O'Reilly or Limbaugh to moderate.

As as aside, Rush Limbaugh continues to assert (see his Jul 19 2007 show transcript) that there is no civil war in Iraq.

This is not denial, it is baldfaced lying spun to satisfy neocon long-term planning.

There is no exit strategy, because Bush is never planning to leave Iraq, until every barrel of oil is pumped out

America won the war in Iraq. It was never a question about winning the "war". But, man oh man are we losing the occupation. If Canada or Mexico invaded the U.S. we'd be doing the same things (ok most) that the people of Iraq are doing to our troops. The world knows we mugged Iraq and in the mideast that's going to be remembered for generations. The current U.S. administration has committed war crimes and the only way to redeem our nation is to bring them up on criminal charges and let the world judge them in the Hague.

If Bush were to announce that he wanted the Iraqis to pass a bill nationalizing their oil fields (Sounds strange because of course their oil fields belong to their country.), it would take some pressure off U.S. forces. Then, unannounced, in the dead of night, transport planes could land to evacuate troops in the center of Iraq, while troops near Kuwait and other "friendly" countries made a dash out of Iraq. By the time the Iraqis figured out what was happening and started pursuit which would be hampered by our air power, our troops would have too much of a head start.

As for the mercenaries, they would be on their own. Perhaps they should think about leaving, now.

When Bush claims the commitment to Iraq is open-ended and long-term, doesn't that lend aid and comfort to al Qaida as it reinforces their message and helps with their recruitment? And wasn't al Qaida supposed to be the enemy?

But I do not know whether it is appropriate to state that "Bush gives aid and comfort to the enemy," because, frankly, I believe Bush is the enemy of the American people and the US constitution, just as much or even more than his Saudi friends, including bin Laden, are.

Please remember what George W. Bush once said. I don't have the exact wording, but it was something like "Ending the Iraq War will be the next guy's problem." (Among the many things we have learned to detest about him, we should always remember that he's a little pr*ck as well.)

So what's he doing now? He's "freezing the ball" - keeping the momentum (b*llsh*t) going until it's too late for any one to do anything but just hold off until that "next guy" actually comes. This timing should come around election time, forcing the Democrats to self-destruct on what to do next.

Bush and the Neo-Cons can hang in there for that long. Of course everyday young people die.

But it's a good strategy. By then, Dubee-ya will be too much of a "short-timer" to really be allowed to anything further in Iraq. This is the neo-con strategy. Stall the game until the Democrats are in and no one will look back to how bad the Republicans did (or how we got there in the first place).

It will work for the Republicans overall also. The Democrats will have a living nightmare on their hands. Nothing they do will be right or fast enough. Everyone will focus on their mistakes, giving the neo-cons the opportunity to burrow into the ground for 7 years, living as larvae on Fox News' drippings and plan their next assault on freedom.

Meanwhile, everyday people die.

Read this. It says it all.

http://www.miamiherald.com/424/story/177167.html

From Ian Welsh, Truthout, 07-23-07:

"One event that caused a lot of discussion and concern this week (with Paul Craig Roberts going so far as to say it was the last necessary piece being put in place before a possible coup) was the release of a Presidential order giving the administration the power to freeze assets of any person or entity considered to be "undermining" efforts to stabilize Iraq."

"Edelman wrote that "premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq."

Does that mean the Clinton fortune is about to be frozen?

From Ian Welsh, Firedoglake:

"One event that caused a lot of discussion and concern this week (with Paul Craig Roberts going so far as to say it was the last necessary piece being put in place before a possible coup) was the release of a Presidential order giving the administration the power to freeze assets of any person or entity considered to be "undermining" efforts to stabilize Iraq."

---

"Edelman wrote that "premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq."

Does that mean the Clinton fortune is about to be frozen?

Impeachment now, then beginning the trial.

However, the trial will take time that is true.

It will be interesting for the American public to see the evidence presented in the prosecution and again in the defense during the trial.

Perhaps we will get to see the US government more clearly.

We have all the time in the world to advance the principles of democracy and work on practicing them.

One thing that ought to keep the Democrats from pursuing impeachment is that we may find that they were very willing collaborators in the crimes of the administration. It thus will make it just as hard to vote for a Democrat as a Republican

So let's have an impeachment and a trial and then let's clean house and find human beings to represent Americans in the Congress and Executive Branch

There used to be an old phrase in the male dominated business world and it went something like "don't complain...don't explain".

This was suppose to be a man's way of not whining and not making excuses. These guys live by this phrase, but have it twisted around to suit their purposes. This explains all the lies, deceptions and stonewalling combined with never admitting that they ever did ANYTHING wrong.

moonraven

Speaking for the average Canadian, I don't think you have to worry about Canada invading the United States anytime soon. For one thing, our entire army can fit inside one hockey arena. For another, what army we have is mired in a useless war in Afghanistan where they are dying in a lost cause (hmm. Who started THAT one again?). We have a spineless federal government which patterns itself after your Bush administration. In short, we've got enough problems of our own, we don't need to invade the U.S. to take on yours.

The software industry has a term for what we're now engaged in in Iraq. It's called a "death march," popularized by Ed Yourdon's book, er... "Death March." Basically it connotes a project whose scope has moved beyond the ability of the team attempting to complete it. Actually, it was always beyond them, due to poor planning, inadequate engineering foresight, and unrealistic expectation.
I myself was involved in a "death march" professional experience some years back and I can say that it was one of the most demoralizing experiences of my life, mostly because everyone involved knows what's happening long before the plug is ever pulled. But you keep slogging away, collected those paychecks, because neither you nor anyone else has either the brains or the balls to speak truth about the hopelessness. And that, of course, is the most demoralizing, shameful part.

From the "Death March" Wikipedia entry:

"The knowledge of the doomed nature of the project weighs heavily on the psyche of its participants, as if they are helplessly watching the team as it marches into the sea."

Sound familiar?

Dear George:

It's the war, Stupid!
It's the oil, Stupid!
It's our dead,Stupid!

Would somebody with a strong military background respond to the following?
This administration has used 2 major lying threads to dismiss withdrawing ASAP from Iraq.
1. Leaving now would cause a horrendous bloodbath among the Iraquis[as if it hasn't been that for more than a decade]-but I have questions about what they've said at times about reason 2.
2.A withdrawal would create unacceptable US casualties.Is that refutable as a dumb-ass response or would another year or so of involvement at these troop levels make any difference if there is actually any intention of ever withdrawing?As long as the US made it perfectly clear that if they were to withdraw any major attacks would be dealt with severely [would anyone doubt our willingness to be brutal?]-couldn't this be pulled off with little loss of troops? I know-for most readers-it's about the oil stupid!My questions are searching for the best way to convince those still wavering in their view of the admin's lies.