The idea was that if we avoided rubbing Iraqi noses in the brutal fact that we had conquered their country the "insurgency" would die out

Post title from Peter Mulhern

We cannot avoid the fact that any kind of withdrawal schedualed as result of inability to succeed, even for GOOD reasons (like the Iraqis not committing to ending the death squads, and tacitly support them) , means that JIhadistan wins, if you believe, of course that this IS part of the single global war out there, if you don't then not a day or a nickel was worth merde, let alone an american life.

And that becomes the question. As it always should have been. Not because of WMD, but because unless the entire historic dynamic of the middle east was radically altered all this stuff could only end one way.

Nice try, but you can't do it on the cheap, and without the entire nation engaged, rather than thinking about Goliath the fat cat, and the Donald Vs Rosie in a death match of combovers vs professional ass.

That agenda of priorities is set in the White House. Mr. Bush was in the wrong game, having been advised by Tenet of WMD 'slam dunk' and extrapolating the word cakewalk to mean 'Jeffersonian march to democracy' as opposed to 'crushing the corrupt army of a corrupt murdering SOB' and thereby conquering a prostrate nation.
.

Which brings us to Babs and Condi, and their tasteless tryst of acting vs poor judgement and personal vitriol <> a signifying aside of durable stupidity.

Continue reading "The idea was that if we avoided rubbing Iraqi noses in the brutal fact that we had conquered their country the "insurgency" would die out for lack of fuel." »