Washington Stands Humbled in Iraq

[Iceburg]

http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/6387/
<snip>

Washington Stands Humbled in Iraq

The latest Washington Post-ABC News Poll which depicts the US President Bush leading against his Democratic opponent by five percent on security matters must bring little comfort to Bush on the Iraq front. He knows that the US troubles in Iraq are unending. The early war days Rumsfeld jubilance has been hijacked by caution, casualties and chaos. The end March gross but inevitable act by some in the Iraqi resistance of dragging the corpses of four US security men has reignited a seemingly unstoppable cycle of violence. Rumsfeld who until recently relished his men’s ‘containment skills’ after invading and occupying Iraq, has recognized their limits in Fallujah and in Najaf. US has asked for a cease-fire demanded that militias under varied leadership surrender their weapons. The going ahs got tough for the US. Its macabre war machine driven by a neo-con authored mess in Iraq is unable to ‘deliver’ a political victory.

Iraq, with or without Saddam Hussain, is poses the greatest post-Vietnam challenge to the US establishment. Endless occupation and continuing ground operations are no option for the US. Multiple factors are weakening the US position in Iraq. Trouble spots are plenty.
<snip>
....
<snip>
However the foremost and consistent critic the former General Anthony Zinni of the U.S. Central Command has spoken again. In his April 16 interview with The San Diego Union-Tribune Zinni said "I think that some heads should roll over Iraq," Zinni said. "I think the president got some bad advice." Zinni who also served as special envoy to the Middle East under the Bush administration opposed the war arguing that “whoever believed that an Iraq war would help to solve the Palestinian problem must live on another planet. “ In his Tribune interview he said "I've been called a traitor and a turncoat for mentioning these things.. " Zinni said the United States must now rely on the U.N. to pull its "chestnuts out of the fire in Iraq." He added “"We're betting on the U.N., who we blew off and ridiculed during the run-up to the war…Now we're back with hat in hand. It would be funny if not for the lives lost."

Last September while being interviewed by NBC’s anchor Ted Koppel on NightLine Zinni was very critical of the Bush team’s ignorance on Iraq. Zinni was brutal, “"I've spent the last 15 years of my life in this part of the world. And I'll tell you, every time I hear...one of the dilettantes back here speak about this region of the world, they don't have a clue. They don't understand what makes them tick. They don't understand where they are in their own history. They don't understand what our role is....” Predicting a strategic failure Zinni had said “ We are great at dealing with the tactical problems--the killing and the breaking. We are lousy at solving the strategic problems; having a strategic plan, understanding about regional and global security and what it takes to weld that and to shape it and to move forward." Zinni ahs been comparing Bush’s questionable assertion about Iraq possessing WMDs with the Gulf of Tonkin incident--an infamous episode in which President Lyndon Johnson misrepresented an attack on two U.S. Navy destroyers in order to win congressional approval of the war in Vietnam.
<snip>
more http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/6387/

[xchrom]

1. well at least zinni is out there speaking

but -- what the fuck -- what he's saying is so obvious and he is hardly an isolated voice but one gets the impression that there are so few in his camp.
hello? remember the pre-war protests -- circling the damn globe?
sometimes all this makes me feel very tired.

[izzie]

2. Well maybe it will make some people think.

Great armies do not always win.

[Jim Cane]

3. chimp leads lurch

President Bush leading against his Democratic opponent by five percent on security matters must bring little comfort to Bush on the Iraq front.

Do you know why this is? It's because the American people think that getting rid of Saddam was a good idea. The big mistake that the Dems made was in choosing a constipated lurch like Kerry to compete against an amiable, smirking chimp like bush. And Kerry isn't
making the case against bush. He's digging a hole for himself. "I'm for losing the war and high gas prices" is a losing platform. And to think you could have had Edwards - a positive voice and a born winner.

The case against bush is not that he invaded Iraq. The Dems are losing on this issue because they are leaving out the other half of the equation - the fact that, by engaging Iraq, we are NOT
then able to fully engage al qaeda.

Because our military forces have been siphoned off and are now bogged down in order to facilitate the smirking chimp's personal peeing contest, bin laden is still walking around free, al queda is not destroyed, and the Iraqi excursion (tho' I'm happy to see the hussien boys dead and saddam in custody) has resulted in pushing many many
more marginal muslims into the extremeist camp.

I don't want kerry to win, but at the same I do want to see chimpy thrown out. You guys need to fix this situation and make the case that:

(W's war for "Freedom and Democracy" in Iraq) = (Loss of Freedom and Democracy in the U.S. + WTC murders go unavenged + bin laden remains free)

That's what will sell in Peoria.
Edwards would have figured this out by now. Ketchup boy sure hasn't.

[rfkrocks]

4. Your analysis is leaves out the economy (edwards did do it better)

-we Democrats believe in economic justice and now you have President AWOL cutting the taxes of the wealthy while engaging in Iraq-that is a big factor because the GOP is now the party of massive debt which will destroy the middle class with inevitable inflation-jeez even Ike said "a bankrupt nation is a defenseless nation" Guess what-the US is bankrupt-they are hiding the cost of the war (just like they hide the coffins of the dead soldiers) because it will cost billions more at least 85 billion more just through the fall on top of the 187 billion already spent-the fact is the chimp has pretty much smashed the economic health of the country-also isn't it time we did something about oil dependence-why do SUVs get tax breaks-that is a policy of a moron which our country continues to follow-I understand we got a rush out of catching Saddam but it cost the future of the country an our military is shot

[dawg]

5. I think you are mostly correct.

The fact that a majority of Americans still believe Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks makes a big difference too.

People say, "Have you forgotten?"

I say, "Hell no, but what does that have to do with Iraq?"

[bemildred]

6. You are wrong.

It was no mistake that Kerry was foisted on us.
But he is still likely to win, Shrub and his minions
really are stupid.