March 2008 Archives

It seems as though we're about to see if the gambit - the "Patreus Gambit" - that the right wing has made in Iraq is about to explode in our collective faces. One of the big victories that the "pro surge" crowd has won, imho, was the tamping down of news stories regarding Iraq - a dramatic victory by any measure. As you can see from the McClatchy graphic on the right, the number of news stories regarding Iraq have plummeted over 2007. This is a "victory" for those in the pro surge camp because one of their fundamental premises of their theory of Iraq is that the large number of "negative" news stories about Iraq is the principle reason why support for the war back here in the USA has steadily dropped since it was obvious we weren't going to have a cakewalk.

Now, it's always been a staple of the pro war crowd throughout the five year long campaign in Iraq. Long before the beginning, the crowd responsible for this disaster has been far more focussed on controlling the politically correct expression of support rather than actually - you know - focussing on such trivial things as accomplishing their stated goals. But now there's a rather distressing wrinkle. No one can deny that that the last year has seen a dramatic drop in the reporting coming out from Iraq. And yet here we are, standing on the precipice of some really nasty shit.

As has been repeatedly pointed out by those on the "let's leave Iraq now" side of the debate, military success was never the point of the surge and while the relative success of the surge from a military perspective is certainly welcome news, it's a pyrrhic victory without the corresponding political victories. And so I thought it was pretty ironic to find the article in Foreign Policy wagging its collective finger at the skeptics of "teh surge" proudly proclaiming, just a day before the current bruhaha, Iraq’s Unheralded Political Progress

We’ve been hearing for months that the U.S. troop surge has been a security success and a political failure. But with little media fanfare, Iraqis may have just found the key to resolving their differences: old-fashioned politics.

Now, I take it for granted that the frothing at the mouth will continue to say that the reporting out of Iraq - in this case McClatchy - is the cause for the current situation. How that is possible is anyone's guess, but one can't educate political fools. However, I'm dying to hear Michael O'Hanlon's explanation as to why things went from "everything's coming up roses" to "fertilizer" in the span of a few days. Given that he's able to completely delude himself at every step of the way so far, while simultaneously whining that he doesn't get any good gigs any more, I have no doubt that he'll be able to put his extra special spin on the current POS. I just can't wait to hear what it is.

Regardless, what ever his and other's contrived explanations are, I'm betting that this is going to really suck for McCain, seeing as how he was just over there telling everyone that everything is coming up roses. The current situation may be over in a couple of days due to the fantastic performance of the Iraqi army - heck, anything is possible, I suppose. But my guess is that the Iraqis have pretty much had it up to here with all the shit that's been going on and really won't take "wait" for an answer any more - regardless of who they are. Which is pretty much the argument of those who opposed the surge all along - i.e. that we need to let the Iraqis settle this themselves, and that our being in Iraq, taking arbitrary sides in a civil war, was only going to make things worse. What appears to have happened is that rather than giving the Iraqis breathing space to work out their political differences - as Jason Gluck insists they have been doing to great success - they've been fuming and feeding their grievances to the point where they have finally exploded to the fore.

Given the current state of the US military and the shoddy state of the Iraqi military and given the nature of a civil war where you simply don't know what the fuck is going on in the first place and whom to back, I'm pretty sure that whatever success we can attribute to the surge is about to evaporate in the brutal summer heat of Iraq.

Amy Sullivan. Andrew Sullivan

One is a blogger who works for a magazine who castigates liberals continuously regarding religion and other matters. The other is a blogger who works for a magazine who castigates liberals continuously regarding religion and other matters.

One is a concern troll who once called liberals a fifth column waiting to undermine America when it was most vulnerable. The other is a concern troll who believes that liberals simply don't pander enough to the religious right.

I'm beginning to get a clear picture of just how fucked the democrats are going to be this November. Exhibit A has to be the whole way the "McCain is so stupid he keeps saying Al Qaeda is getting assistance from Iran" meme is being handled.

Look people. Regardless of whether this is a gaffe or not, it's something that the ENTIRE right wing believes anyway. Hell, probably the entire press corps covering this election believe it. Certainly, it's the line that the current administration has been pushing since the beginning of recorded history.

So, not only are the reporters going to forgive it, they're going to start repeating it pretty soon now that it's almost common wisdom. Pretty much the only thing this whole attempt at showing how stupid McCain has done is reenforce the belief in the minds of the right and his base (that would be the reporters covering the election) that he is right and the left is filled with a bunch of loons which simply don't "get it".

Seriously dudes, this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg here. It's only going to get better from here out, and quite frankly the strategy y'all have come up with to deal with this Frankenstein's monster of a republican candidate is like shooting spit balls at a tank.

Update: Indeed

So, I guess it's like the FIFTH anniversary of the Iraq war. Couple of things spring to mind upon hearing this. First, of course, is that "my, how times flies when you're having fun". I mean, war's the best! And this war is teh bomb of them all.

Second thing that comes to mind is how fucking prescient I am. In lieu of actual blog posting which would take actual work, I'll just recycle my blog post from the beginning of this never ending shit storm and go back to my hole until next year when I'll wake up again, see my shadow and predict another five more years again.

No doubt there's going to be a lot of journalistic chatter about whether it's right to protest during a war. Already the elected Democrats are unified in their silence regarding criticism. Media personalities and corporations are making statements about their policy of criticism during war time. Statements of admitted self censorship.

Let's just be blunt and say if we're marching into Baghdad victorious with roses showering the troops, democracy flowers in the middle east and Israel and Palestine are economically cooperating powerhouses living in peace there isn't going to be a single charge leveled against anyone. We'll have a 100 year reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis and no one will be able to defeat them politically.

So, it should be useful for all citizens of the United States of America to stop for a moment and list three or four measurable things your expecting to see get better or worse. Maybe if our crack journalists looking for blog fill or something else can start coming up with a list of things we can start gauging the success or failure - or 90 degree optimal outcome of an orthogonal vector Hilbert space of doom, super complex thing-a-majigy - of this thing called the War with Iraq.

So here are three of mine.

First, on March 17, 2004 - a year from now - our Terror Threat Level better be on fucking serene white. If a year from now we're still on piss yellow or scared shitless orange Terror Threat Level, then I'd say the Administration sold us a bill of goods. Quite simply, this war of choice - a preemptive war - hasn't made us any safer. If the Terror Threat Level isn't on Economy is Booming pink on March 17, 2005 - two years from now - I'm thinking we're in the toilet and the Administration put us there.

Second, one year from now, if Iraq is essentially the same security state as Palestine is under Israel today we have a 10 year occupation on our hands. If we still have troops fighting, suicide bombers and all the trappings of modern day Palestine, the critics of this war with Iraq are right. The administration has sold us a bill of goods that we were going to paying for decades from now - occupation of chaos is costly both in dollar terms and lives lost.

Third, if we haven't found any credible evidence of WMD, nefarious connections with Al Qaeda, rape rooms and baby killing factories a year from now, we've been sold a bill of goods. By credible, I mean independently verified. I think the US should take it upon themselves to bring in UN investigators and monitors to ensure that all revelations and facts are verified. We've seen the finest US intelligence agencies and US state department fooled by amateur forgeries, RC model "WMD delivery vehicles" made out of duct tape and weed whackers, as well as Aluminum tubes not as suspicious as we were told. So anything we won't let Hans Blix verify the validity of, I claim is too suspect for evidence in satisfaction of this criteria - either way.

So, I say let the bones roll as the die is already cast. Here's my criteria in a thumbnail. What's yours?

If you don't have one until after the fact, you're just a historian.

So Geraldine Ferraro made quite the stir suggesting - no, strike that, she simply came right out and stated - that if Obama was white, he wouldn't be where he is now. And I have to say that I agree with her 100%. Let's face it. If Obama was a white dude with the charisma and political ability that Obama has shown, comined with his ability to inspire hundreds of thousands.... well, he certainly wouldn't be battling it out with HRC in a neck and neck fight for the democratic nomination.

He'd have clinched this long, long ago and HRC would be a faded memory and working for his election.

The sad fact is that if it weren't for his race, he'd have been the second coming of Bill Clinton - only this time for real. If he was a white man, he would have sewn up the nomination in record time without even breaking a sweat.

But the fact is, he isn't white, and Geraldine Ferraro is making a complete ass of herself when she claims that Obama's race is his *advantage* over HRC.

As a white man in today's USA, I can tell you that we have a stunning advantage over women - of any race - and of men who aren't of Caucasian decedents. And the simple fact is that both racism and sexism are rampant in today's society, despite any claims that both have been somehow purged from at least the American society.

It is well past time for someone other than a white man to hold the office of President of these United States and from the looks of things, it seems almost certain that we're going to have that finally come true. Well, if HRC and her band of merry hooligans don't fuck things up in their desperate attempt to win the party nomination by any means, that is.

I'm getting pretty tired of this whole battle and I'm beyond tired of this crap that one side seems to be pushing out. Clearly, at least this campaign has shown woman can be as much as an asshole as any man and I'm sure that's a qualifying argument for the office of the President in the minds of many.

But I'd really wish people like Ferraro would take a step back, take a few deep breaths and really think about what they're saying. Replace "race" with "gender" in any stupid statements you are about to make and think about how offended you would be if some black man said it.

Seriously, people. WTF?