BFC 2019

Greetings from the Southern California desert!

Pacific Northwest Edition

Greetings to the few people who have viewed or are viewing this blog. It has been some time since my last post. Many changes in the world many changes in your poor correspondents life. I find myself living in the Pacific Northwest of the good ol' USA. Just reading that the Iraqi police lack the firepower to fight ISIS and that American advisers are "advising" what ever the hell that means. Oh ya, I know what it means. Combat troops back in Iraq under a benevolent name. How sweet. Well that is about all I have for my first post in several years. Look forward to sharing more with you dear reader. Poor Sancho

I need to start writing again

Day of Thanks

I am reposting this from last year. Cause I like it.


Today is Thanksgiving, and in some strange far off land there is an American hunkered down, scared and longing for home, yet willing to serve his or her country in the proud tradition of the United States Military.

You deserve our respect. Insh Allah you will come home safe.

Following is Abraham Lincoln's proclamation establishing the first official Thanksgiving.

The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they can not fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God.

In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign states to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict, while that theater has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.

Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense have not arrested the plow, the shuttle, or the ship; the ax has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well as the iron and coal as of our precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield, and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.

It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people. I do therefore invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the imposition of the Almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with the divine purpose, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity, and union.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this 3d day of October, A.D. 1863, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-eighth.
Abraham Lincoln

The Funny's with Mike Luckovich

No End in Sight, Redux

The War in Afghanistan for the United States is in it's eighth year, mostly out of neglect from the Bush Administration and it's invasion of Iraq as well as a dubious strategy that lacked any foresight or basic intelligence. As a result of these failed policies and it's blundering into, and inability to get of, Iraq, President Obama is forced to start from scratch and develop a coherent strategy for combat operations and civilian support in Afghanistan.

After the failed six years of flailing around Iraq and the countless poor decisions and utter lack of planning for the invasion and aftermath of Iraq, is it no wonder the Bush Regime completely failed in Afghanistan?

Strategery, Redux?

President Barack Obama, in one of his first actions since being sworn in, signed an executive order to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba within one year. This being the place where Americans tortured suspected terrorists under direct orders from the highest levels of the United States government.

It would have been easy to predict the complaints from those who support these tactics, such as "America will be less safe" or "enhanced" interrogations work. No, the plumb that the right wingers are hurling around is this one: "How dare he do that without proper planning." You heard right, the Republicans are mad that the President is entering into serious areas of national security and foreign policy without proper "planning."

Now, anyone who has even a passing knowledge of the invasion of Iraq and it's horrible aftermath, you might find this laughable, if it were not that the complete lack of planning from the moment the government in Iraq fell has directly led to the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi's, and the lives of over four thousand two hundred Americans.

Let's review. The GOP, the Republicans, are upset over poor PLANNING!

Imagine this. The U.S. has successfully toppled Saddam Hussein and overthrew his government. Within weeks, weeks! the entire senior military command was being replaced, yes that great Tommy Franks cut and ran the minute the statue came down. In addition, the planning that was going on was to withdraw most of the troops within 6 months from Iraq, not planning for the possibility of an armed insurgency, which has led directly to the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi's and the lives of four thousand two hundred Americans.

Furthermore, the lack of planning for the occupation from a quality of life standpoint for the average Iraqi was criminal, in my opinion. Baghdad still only gets half a day of electricity.

And the Republicans still want to discuss planning? In the words of EX- President Bush: "Bring it on."

The Dark Side, Again

President Bush and Vice President Cheney are conducting legacy tour of interviews and speeches with the hope, albeit slim, of resurrecting public opinion on their administration and its often dubious record on treatment of detainees in its so called "war on terror."

It pains me as an American to think that agents of my country have engaged in acts to detainees that the U.S. military considered illegal during World War II, indeed charging the Japanese soldiers who carried out these acts of barbarism, including water boarding.

Now we have Cheney, second in command of the Bush Regime, claiming water boarding is an acceptable form of interrogation for peaceful democracies to engage in. Amazing.

When thinking of these egregious breaches of all that is good and decent, it reminds me of another President straining the bounds of Presidential authority, Richard Nixon and his Watergate. And when thinking of decisions made at the top, at the ground zero of American power, these words from Judiciary Committee member Rep. Lawrence Hogan, (R) Maryland during Watergate hearings:

"The thing that's so appalling to me is that the President, when this whole idea was suggested to him, didn't, in righteous indignation, rise up and say, "Get out of here, you're in the office of the President of the United States. How can you talk about blackmail and bribery and keeping witnesses silent? This is the presidency of the United States." But my President didn't do that. He sat there and he worked and worked to try to cover this thing up so it wouldn't come to light."

These words ring true today as loud and clear as they did way back in 1974.

Don't Tread on Me?

The shoe throwing incident yesterday puts the perfect ending "still President" Bush. It pleased me to now end. Now, normally I would be upset at the President, any president, being treated in such a scurvy a fashion, but in this case, the parting kiss to the dog.

Day of Thanks

Today is Thanksgiving, and in some strange far off land there is an American hunkered down, scared and longing for home, yet willing to serve his or her country in the proud tradition of the United States Military.

You deserve our respect. Insh Allah you will come home safe.

Following is Abraham Lincoln's proclamation establishing the first official Thanksgiving.

The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they can not fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God.

In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign states to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict, while that theater has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.

Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense have not arrested the plow, the shuttle, or the ship; the ax has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well as the iron and coal as of our precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield, and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.

It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people. I do therefore invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the imposition of the Almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with the divine purpose, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity, and union.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this 3d day of October, A.D. 1863, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-eighth.
Abraham Lincoln

Cut and Run?

Following is the article from the "Status of Forces Agreement" between Iraq and the United States addressing the withdrawal of United States military forces from Iraq.

I have been quite overwhelmed since reading this document, and just as underwhelmed by the coverae given by the news media.

George Bush signed an iron-clad agreement setting a firm, set date for the withdrawal of all American forces frm Iraq, something he said as recently as this year would be the worng thing to do, sending a wrong signal to the terrorists and so forth. He also spent the entire 2004 Presidential campaign calling Kerry a "cut and runner" for wanting to set a timeline for withdrawal.

Anyway, just read this passage and tell me what your thoughts are...

Article 24
Withdrawal of American Forces from Iraq
Admitting to the performance of Iraqi forces, their increased capabilities and assuming full responsibility for security and based upon the strong relationship between the two parties the two parties agreed to the following:

All U.S. forces are to withdraw from all Iraqi territory, water and airspace no later than the 31st of December of 2011.

All U.S. combat forces are to withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages, and towns not later than the date that Iraqi forces assume complete responsibility of security in any Iraqi province. The withdrawal of U.S. forces from the above-mentioned places is on a date no later than the 30 June 2009. The withdrawing U.S. forces mentioned in item (2) above are to gather in the installations and areas agreed upon that are located outside of cities, villages and towns that will be determined by the Joint Military Operation Coordinating Committee (JMOCC) before the date determined in item (2) above.

The United States admits to the sovereign right of the Iraqi government to demand the departure of the U.S. forces from Iraq at anytime. The Iraqi government admits to the sovereign right of the United States to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq at anytime.

The two parties agree to put a mechanism and preparations for reducing the number of U.S. forces during the appointed period. And they are to agree on the locations where the forces are to settle.

Sunday Funnies?

Powell Endorses Obama

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama for President on "Meet the Press" this morning, in a sharp break from his party and his former boss, giving a huge boost to the Democratic nominee for President from one of the most respected military figures in American history.

In sober, measured words, Mr Powell said that over the past several weeks during the financial meltdown, Mr. Mcain was "unsure how to deal with the economic crisis," and criticized Mcains selection of Governor Palin by saying "I dont believe she is ready to be President," while Mr. Obama has shown a "steadiness and intellectual curiosity" that makes him ready to be President "On day one."

One of the most poignant moments of the interview came when Mr. Obama was decrying the tone the Mcain campaign has taken with regard to character assassination and the tying of Obama to former Weather Underground and domestic terrorist William Ayers. Mr. Powell relayed the now well known moment at a recent Mcain event where a woman said to Mr. Mcain that she does not trust Mr. Obama because he is an "arab," to which Mr Mcain simply said "no m'am, he is a decent family man," which Mr. Powell said "was the wrong answer."

Mr. Powell then went on to say what the correct answer should have been, which this humble blogger completely agrees with and was on his feet cheering as i heard him say "What if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no, that is not America."

He went even further, in what can only be described as a complete repudiation of the Republican party by one of the most respected Americans in history, saying "I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might be associated with terrorists, this is not the way we should be doing it in America."

But the most effective argument against the demonization of Muslim Americans came when he told of a photo essay he recently saw in a magazine, and one photo of a woman weeping over a headstone at Arlington Cemetery, and at the top was not a cross, nor a star of david, but a crescent and a star, the symbol of the "Islamic Faith." A Muslim American who died serving his native land in a far away country inhabited by millions of Muslims, Iraq.



Please click here to view full Meet the Press interview with Colin Powell

Joke of the Day

Debate Stuff

Just an observation or 2 from the recent Presidential debate.

Did anyone else notice, there was not one stupid social issue? No immigration, no gay marriage, no stupid gun rights, nothing about "activist" judges. Just talk, albeit lamely, on the economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And did anyone notice that Mcain really, really doesnt like Obama? He looks at him with such contempt, when he looks at him at all. And this business of "that one" and his advisers saying it was his attempt at humor was so lame, it was actually funny!

If you have to explain the joke...well its not that funny.

And dont be looking for Palin on SNL anytime soon. Because she doesnt get the joke, how can you be in on it?

Anyway, I am glad to see the numbers of Obama rising and staying steady so close to the election. He has held an 11 point advantage for the past two 3 day rolling Gallup polls.

In my humble opinion, he will continue this lead, giving back a few points before election, keeping a outside margin of error lead. Cross your fingers!

Breaking News-No lapel Flag Pin, Mcain Un-American?

Ok, i admit, the subject is a bit over the top, but thanks to my friends at Crooksandliars.com and their fine post noticing that one of the candidates was without required American flag lapel pin.

Credibility?

In another attempt to shake up his dying presidential bid, Senator John Mcain has suspended his campaign, in order to put "country first" while the 700 billion dollar bailout of Wall Street is being debated. Dont be fooled by these desperate moves.

Whenever he is in trouble, Mcain plays the distraction game, just as he did with his selection of the so called "hockey mom" whatever the hell that is, Sarah Palin. In the most recent hail mary pass, Mcain said he would suspend his campaign and not attend the first presidential debate. In this he is hoping the voters see him as a bold leader, putting nation ahead if his personal goals. But this is a crassly political move, to distract you from the fact that within the space of a week he said the "fundamentals of our economy are strong," only to have his running mate say we could be on the brink of a depression. Oh wait, he also opposed the AIG bailout before he was for it. And he calls this leadership?

And now we, the US taxpayer, are supposed to foot the bill for a 700 billion dollar blank check, to be given to ONE person, the sec of the treasury, and unelected, appointed position by the President, you remember him I am sure?

I am well aware that this is a major crisis that needs to be addressed with urgency, but that does not mean it must be rammed down the throats of the American people. Think of 700 billion dollars. That is more than the Iraq War has cost, and we are supposed to just accept it because the people in Washington say it must be done? Reminds me of the run up to the war. Bush says it must be done, he will accept nothing but his own proposal, a 3 page, 3 page document giving almost unlimited spending authority in the hands of one man, and he was not elected, or even hanging chadded elected. We must not rush into this, in my opinion. But we do need to give Wall Street some comfort, so bill must be passed very soon. Just let us know the truth, none of this "fundamentals are strong" bullshit.

Furthermore, where has the President been in all of this? He waits ten days to give a speech on the crisis, and when he does, he gives us a history lesson on how we got in this mess, and little on what needs to be done. Instead, for the past week, he has let Treasury Sec Paulson and Fed Chief Bernanke do all the talking, since as the GOP propagandists have repeatedly said they have more credibility on the issue than the President. Imagine that. He has lost credibility, even among his own cabal. Indeed Rep King, republican of New York said those exact words, that they have more cred than he does on this issue, and then went on to say it reminded him of how the President used Gen Petraeus when his credibility on the War in Iraq was bankrupt. He could not have made a more damning assessment of the standing of the President in the peoples eyes. It was amazing, and i dont think he intended to convey that message. I noticed, jumped out of my seat, but i doubt many others will notice.

So here we have a war with no end in sight, and a huge financial crisis that we have no idea what the outcome will be, and a President, by his own right wingers admission, that has no credibility on either issue. And we are supposed to trust him that he has answers? Not this American.

USA-A OK!

Have you seen it?

I just finished reading an article by Dana Milbank of the Washington Post. In it he describes how the Pentagon is continuing a practice started under Sec Def Rumsfeld that media is not to have access to funerals of fallen service personnel killed in the line of duty in Iraq. This is one of the worst practices, of many, that the Bush Adm has employed to not remind the otherwise occupied with other things America that there is a full scale shooting war involving the entire U.S. military that has killed in excess of 4000 Americans, and untold tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's.

The practice of shielding the military dead from the U.S. public starts from the moment the brave fallen arrive at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware. No photographs are allowed besides official military ones, and then they are released on with a freedom of information request. This practice has been in place for several administrations, including the Clinton Adm. I hve never understood this one.

But the most egregious abuses have taken place under the Bush Administration. The manipulation begins when the public affairs office for the Army calls a family of a fallen soldier who have already granted media access and pressures them to move the media back from the proceedings, so they cannot hear any of the eulogy of see the flag ceremony and presentation to the family.

In a war that the President says is being waged for the very survival of the United States, indeed western civilzation as a whole, he has asked the nation for absolutely no sacrifice. When about 1 percent of the population is directly involved, that says volumes. There is a saying that has been in use for some time now, and that is "the United States is not at war in Iraq, merely the United Stated Military.

Yet, the President would have us believe Americans are not dying or coming home lame, blind, insane from Iraq. When was the last time you saw a funeral of a fallen soldier, marine? Or god forbid, a picture of a dead American, or even bleeding American.

It is shameful, in my opinion.

Liebermann and Dead Americans

So Joe Liebermann thinks that if Barack Obama is elected President there is a good chance there will be a terrorist attack within his first year in office. Now the Mccain surrogate says he also meant that if Mccain was elected, the same could happen, based on the fact the 2 World Trade center attacks happened in the first year of Clinton, and Bush's presidency.

Liebermann would have you believe he was simply making the point that we need leadership and all that from the beginning. Of course we see how much leadership Ole W has offered, so being a chief executive for a large state like Texas obviously does not automatically make you a good president.

It is this obsession the right has with dead Americans. If they are not talking about 9/11, they are hoping for another to show that the "war on terror" is not just some charade. See, if we are attacked again, it shows how stupid Dems are, and that only the wacky right can protect us...

Success

John Mccain recently said we are "winning" the War in Iraq, based on the great "successes" that have been achieved as a result from the surge of troops sent in last year.

To be able to understand what winning means, we must first define success. Baghdad has become a city of ethincally cleansed neighborhoods separated by ten foot high concrete barriers. There are no more mixed areas of Sunni living next to Shiite. That simply does not exist.

Ok, so I was going to write this long piece how life sucks in Iraq and how silly it is for Mccain and Bush and the rest to use words like victory and success, but I just saw on the wire that 51 people killed in a suicide car bomb in Baghdad. Thats so successful, you know.

The kind of success and progress being made in Iraq go like this:

I heard on the news that there was a house break in somewhere in Chicago. So in a preemptive move, I decided to burn my neighbors house down, lest the thieves decide to come to our area. Now, when he is obviously pissed at me, I dig him a ditch to live in. Hey, its offers some shelter. See, makin progress.

Is al-Qaida in Iraq led by foreigners?

Recent documents obtained by CNN appear to contradict another one the Bush Administrations claims about the War in Iraq, specifically that al-Qaida in Iraq is(AQI) a foreign led organization. These documents show that Iraqi's are the ones giving orders, while foreigners are more involved as front line soldiers, such as suicide bombers.

For the past 5 years, the U.S. has made the claim, presumably based on intelligence gathered in Iraq, that AQI's ranks wee made up of Iraqi's with foreign leaders, mostly Saudi's. Now we learn from these documents the opposite.

What to make of this? Well, there are several conclusions to make. The most troubling, yet most plausibe, given recen intelligence failures, is that the U.S. simply got it wrong again. They fit the intelligence to make the narrative that suited them best for public consumption. AQI being a foreign outfit makes it seem more scary, more "bin Laden'ish" as it were. See, having a bunch of Saudis strapping belts of explosives wrapped with ball bearings on the poor helpless Iraqi's is far more insidious than if it is Iraqis giving the orders.

That way, we are fighting the "war on terror" as Bush sees it, as opposed to Iraqi's fighting a foreign occupation.

I am curious to see how Bush spins this one. Their has been little reaction, of course, from Bush and his minions, because they would have to admit a mistake, and we know all about how much the devout born again Christian Bush likes to admit his failings and try to atone for them, as any good Christian is faith bound to perform.

What is a Patriot?

Bright Boys

Watching the testimony of General Petraues and Ambassador to Iraq Crocker giving testimony before Congress, and the stupid, long winded ill informed all too political questions by Senators, and all I can think of is the quote from the movie "All the Presidents Men," when Deep Throat and Bob Woodward are talking in the garage.

"Forget the myths the media's created about the White House. The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand."

This can work for any politicians. Especially when the lights come on in those Senate committee rooms...

Joke of the Day

Monopoly Fight

photo by-Ahmad Al-Rubaye/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

The ongoing offensive by Iraqi and American forces in the southern port city of Basra and its apparent stalemate appears to be a harbinger for the future in Iraq. Notwithstanding the declarative statements by Prime Minister Maliki that the operation would be decisive in eradicating militia control of the southern part of Iraq, these ragtag groups of fighters have fought to a draw the federal forces, backed by U.S. and British warplanes.

With Basra under the control of 3 different militias backed by their respective armed wings, the Badr Organization of the Supreme Islamic Council, the Mahdi Army of radical cleric al-Sadr as well as the Fadhila Party and its fighters, the federal government of Maliki has been unable to assert a monopoly of force in most of southern Iraq.

Though President Bush hailed the offensive as a "bold decision" by Maliki, and stating it that it is turning point in the war, a war that has entered it fifth year, it appears to be destined to be like all the other major "turning points" and show how deep the rifts are between warring factions and how difficult it will be to either bring them together or defeat them outright. It has been apparent that they militias will be very difficult to defeat, as evidenced by the offer of cash payments if the fighters laid down their arms. This after many statements by Maliki that the offensive would be final and defeat "criminal elements" as Maliki called them, from Iraq forever.

Well, this is not happening, and they have fought the Iraq forces backed by US and UK warplanes to a stalemate. It seems like Iraq is seetling into a Lebanon type situation. That is, where you have a federal government unable to exert a monopoly of force throughout the nation, while large cities or areas of land are controlled by political parties backed by military forces. See Hezbollah and Hamas for examples.

In addition to these being politicians and fighters, they are also community leaders, operating schools, hospitals, even gas stations run by the Mahdi Army. SO what oyu end up having are state within states, battling for control of streets and alleys.

It just seems like nothing never gets better, it only gets slightly better or much worse.

Jokes of the Day

Numbers Game

I edited the post "4000" and sent it as a letter to the editor at the Chicago Tribune. They posted it on their "online exclusive" section of the website. Click on title to see letter at the Tribune website.

Power of Art Redux

The following video clip from the "Power of Art" series by Simon Schaama is an excellent example of the repeated marriage of Art and War. As is usual, Art gets the better of War. What a perverse statement.

I first posted this video last year, and felt today was a good day to show it again.

4000

Just learned that the death toll for U.S. Service Personnel in Iraq has reached the 4000 mark. Not sure what to say on this. Need to think for a few minutes.

Though to put it in some context for how bad it is for Iraqi's, that 4000 number was about how many Iraqi's were being killed a month at the height of the violence last year.

Guess I need to think about numbers. What do they mean? Do they mean anything more than a guide post? And we have to find our own way after that? I dont know anymore. If we pull out the violence gets worse, in my opinion, and if we stay it only seems like we keep the lid on, while thousands will still die, in my opinion.

I dont know. Honestly...


cartoon by Jeff Danziger

Molly Cake Takes The Fashion World by Storm!

I know this is not my regular beat, but my good friend Molly has a new blog that is quite fashionable, if I may say so! Check it out, and as always, tip your bartenders!

Click on Molly to be taken on a wonderful journey!

March Madness

Anyone Watching?

Bob Schieffer has a fine commentary on the lack of attention paid to the War in Iraq by the U.S. public. Check it out.

Jokes of the Day

Failure of the Surge

General David Petraeus, the top U.S. general in Iraq recently stated that despite the gains made on the security front by the U.S. and Iraqi military, the government of Iraq has failed to make what he calls "sufficient progress" on the national reconciliation front, meaning the surge strategy has fundamentally failed.

After all, that was the stated goal of the surge. President Bush, when he announced the surge in January 2007, stated that the escalation of troop levels in Iraq was for the purpose of creating breathing space for the warring factions to come together. That has not happened, so says the top U.S. general in Iraq. And with the majority of the surge troops having left or preparing to leave Iraq, while the levels of violence have been steady or increasing since Nov. 2007, so says a GAO study there is little hope the sides will be coming together any time soon.

Beside the failure of the parties to come together, the government has continued to fail its people on the most basic of civic services:electricity, clean drinking water and refuse collection. Without adequately providing these services, I am not convinced this is even a functioning government. And the parliament more often than not fails to have a quorum, so none of the legislative process can move forward.

Furthermore, we have the President out on a speech junket touting the great gains, as he sees them, being made in Iraq. Its a shame this man is a simpleton. He thinks so literally. For example, he thinks all you need to have are elections and a piece of paper entitled "constitution," and voila, you have yourself a full fledged, sovereign democracy. Never mind when asked what sovereignty means to the Iraqis, he answered it means they are "sovereign." Well done.

Now, he sees statistics that show a drop in the monumentally chaotic situation in Iraq, and he see "success." He sees 60% drop in overall violence since the surge started, while I would make the case violence is up overall 40% since the invasion and occupation of the fertile crescent.

Dont believe the hype. The surge fundamentally failed. There has been no national reconciliation.

President Bush gave the first of a series of speeches on Monday with the goal of gaining support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan while trumpetting the reduction in violence in Iraq, ahead of top Iraq general Petraeus' progress report before Congress.

In his testimony, Gen. Petra is expected to address possible troop reductions, though he has hinted at a freeze once the "surge" contingent has been withdrawn.

With violence against Iraqis and deaths among U.S. service personel at levels not seen since 2005, Gen. Petraeus has stated he is reluctant to go below the 130,000 troop level, for fear of losing ground won during the surge.

Admittedly, violence is down in Iraq, it still remains one of, if not the most dangerous places on Earth, and it is of our making.

So now we have the President coming out saying the war is pretty much won, we just have to stick it out a few more months, and "victory" whatever that means now, can be achieved.

At this point I am not opposed to the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq, as I was before. What we have here is one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern times, and it is of our making, the making of the U.S.

I wish the President would just come out and say we need to stay there in order to fix something we have broken. Not for all this stuff about freedom and democracy and evil doers. At long last, havent we had enough of that nonsense?

So I say, how can we abandon a humanitarian disaster of our own making? How in good conscience can we do that? Iraq will not be able to do anything, on their own, or with us, for many years. And without the U.S. it will start to burn and I am afraid it will not be extinguished until it has consumed the cradle of civilization.

Jokes of the Day

Jokes of the Day

Dont Believe the Hype

The surge has been a total success, and we are winning the war in Iraq. Do not believe these statements from the Bush Administration.

We are constantly hearing that violence is down, which is true, yet that is pretty much where the converstation stops. Sure violence is down in Iraq. The problems are with the next sentences, the "ya buts" sentences. The one that go like this

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but the levels are at 2005 levels, which were so high that most thought there was a low grade civil war burning."

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but still 30-60 Americans are being killed each month."

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but Baghdadis still receive only 12 hours a day of electricity."

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but 2/3 of children in Iraq have access to clean drinking water."

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but Bagdad is a segregated city, based on the Sunni-Shia bloodletting. There are no heterogeneous neighborhoods in Baghdad, and the fault lines are still deadly to cross."

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but the U.S. had been paying the Sunni's to lay down there arms, what happens when the U.S. money dries up and the Shiite Iraq central government opposes these "Local Concerned Citizens."

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but there will be more troops in Iraq post surge than pre surge."

"Violence is down in Iraq, ya, but its not on the front pages anymore...."

Outsourced War?

Hopes for success in Iraq rely more on private security contractors, or mercenaries, than the U.S. military, based on the failed recent attempt to oust Blackwater USA by the Iraqi government following a recent incident that left 11 Iraqi civilians dead at the hands of Blackwatwer guards.

Prime Minister Nouri Kamal al-Maliki has stated the killings were in fact illegal and saying this type if incident challenges the sovereignty of Iraq.

These comments not withstanding, the expulsion of Blackwater seems a bit of a stretch, especially when they are the people responsible for guarding all the top level diplomats In Iraq, including Ambassador Ryan Crocker.

“If Blackwater left at this moment, it might leave a security gap because most of the embassies and most of the foreign organizations that are working in Iraq” are guarded by Blackwater, Tahseen al-Sheikhly, a spokesman for the Iraqi security forces, said.

Sheikhly went on to say that if the security firm was expelled, American forces would have to redeploy from other hostile areas to fill the void, leaving a vaccuum sure to be filled by insurgents and terrorists.

So lets get this straight. The U.S. does not have sufficient forces to protect both its highest value people while conducting combat operations with the hope of bringing safety and security to this war ravaged country? And at a time when the President wants to draw down 30,000 troops seems ludicrous to me.

The level of incompetence shown by the Bush Administration in waging this war verges on the criminal, in my opinion.

The President has stated, ad nausea, that the safety and security of every American hinges on the outcome in Iraq. Yet his decisions have gotten the U.S. to a point where they rely more on mercenaries who live outside the law, than the brave Americans who take an oath in the defense of liberty.

Does any of this make sense? Is anyone paying attention?

Joke of the Day

Joke of the Day

Fools Paradise

The President of the United States, in what the White House has dubbed a "major speech" on Iraq, has once again put the blame on the American people if his vision of Iraq is not met.

In his speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Mr. Bush compared the War in Iraq to past wars the U.S. has been involved in while wondering if this current generation would have the “will” to see this conflict through to victory.

This is hubris beyond compare. Here we have the one person solely responsible for the invasion and all the catastrophic errors that followed blaming the one group that has been asked to contribute nothing to the war efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Oh don’t get me wrong, there has been a great investment of blood and treasure, but that has been born by the U.S. military, not the greater U.S. population as a whole. There have been roughly one million U.S. personnel in and out of Iraq, out of a population of 200 million, which is less than 1 percent of the U.S. That’s astounding. Though in all fairness, the President has noticed the toll it has taken on our television viewing, noting that we make sacrifices by having to see unsettling images on our television screens. That is when the news is actually covering the war.

So the President thinks it will be our fault, not his fault, not his leadership, not the militaries fault. No, apparently it will be the American people, who have been asked to bear no burdens, make no sacrifices, and indeed contribute almost nothing to the war effort that will have lost the war in Iraq.

I am personally insulted by his comments, not only for blaming me for losing a war I have nothing to do with, but also because before whenever people criticized the way he was waging a war he never should have started, he would send out the patriotism police to shout down any dissent. And now, after all his terrible decisions that have cost the lives of 3700 Americans and untold tens of thousands of Iraqis, he blames you and me for the failures of his Iraq policy.

Does Mr. Bush take the American people to be fools?

He stumbles this great nation, a nation people actually looked to for moral guidance, into a war half a world away on dubious claims of WMD, then proceeds to inadequately provide enough troops, to deny there is an insurgency, to fail to properly armor the men and machines of war leading to added needless loss of life, while creating the political situation which is on the verge of collapse, he blames you and me for the potential failure in Iraq.

Throughout the speech this quote from the great Hunkpapa Sioux Chief Sitting Bull resounded in my head:

"They tell you I murdered Custer. It is a lie! I am not a War Chief. I was not in the battle that day. His eyes were blinded, so he could not see. He was a fool and rode to his death. He made the fight, not I."

I think the President is a fool.

The Bush Administration is again touting successes and progress in Iraq, and they are selling this over used expression by pointing to the western section of the country, Anbar Province.

There can be no doubt that there has been a turn around in places like the provincial capital of Ramadi, as well as the restive Fallujah. But these gains, if you can call them that, have been made at he expense of the central government in Baghdad. This is because the United States in paying off the tribal sheiks in Anbar with cash and weapons, and ultimately power.

The plan is the U.S. pays off these Sunni tribal leaders, who up to months ago were killing Americans, so they will turn their weapons on al-Qaida.

The problem with this plan is that the Iraqi central government of Nouri Kamal al-Maliki is opposed to the arming of Sunni militias. Now the U.S. claims these Sunni militia members will have to take an oath not to harm Americans, as well as claiming these men will eventually be mustered into the Iraqi Security Forces. Indeed, many of these militia members have already enrolled in the Iraq Police Force, though it is clear their loyalties are to the tribe or sect first, and Iraq second. After all, this is all about power.

What is so frustrating is that this plan flies in the face of attempting to help create a unified Iraq. If that is the plan, it seems the U.S. is setting up the conditions for the real war for power in Iraq. Arming a group, indeed giving legitimacy by entering them in the rolls of the security forces, that has been killing Americans for the past 4 years in hopes of defeating another group that has been killing Americans for the past 4 years, seems like a recipe for disaster.

The point is the U.S. is not winning the hearts and minds of these Sunni insurgent groups with visions of democracy and freedom, but with cold cash and even free guns. What could be more American than that?

How can the United States ever intervene in a genocide if we abandon a genocide of our own making?

No End in Sight

New movie about the occupation of Iraq. I read one review that called it an excellent campanion piece to "Imperial Life in the Emerald City" by Rajiv Chandrasekaran. Click on title to link to theaters the film is playing at

Jokes

Just watching the President give a speech on al-Qaeda in Iraq. He is trying to make his case that al-Qaeda are the only people fighting the U.S. in Iraq, and that AQI is an all foreign group. Bush is doing this by naming the 2 foreign leaders of the group, not mentioning the absolute fact that it is made up almost entirely of Iraqis and is aided and abetted by Iraqi nationals.

The problem with Bush right now is number one he has no credibility when discussing Iraq, intelligence, or just about anything. Fours years of making progress in Iraq lends to this credibility problem for the President. Most people have pretty much tune hime out on matters of Iraq.

He is starting to sound delusional, in my opinion. Does he really think AQI can take over and rule Iraq? Does he really think the Iraqis would be dominated by a foreign entity? Has Mr. Bush missed the last 5 years in Iraq? Iraqis dont like foreigners on there soil occupying them.

Mr Bush, is it AQI who cannot keep the electricity on in Baghdad? Is it AQI who cannot pump even prewar levels of Oil? Is it AQI who will not allow former low level Baathists into society, instead of fueling the insurgency with well trained, motivated soldiers? Is it AQI who cannot provide clean drining water for Baghdad? Is it AQI who is providing the Shiites insurgency with the EFP, the most deadly roadside bomb that can penetrate the main battle tank of the US, the Abrahms tank. Is AQI walling off neighborhoods to separate sects so they wont drill hole eachother to death? Who is doing these things Mr Bush? Its not AQI.

He looks so beleaguered, like a manager for a baseball team that is 20 games out of first. He makes no mention of Sunni, Shiite, civil war. This is the leadership we get? God Help us all.

Oh, FOX "News" is already back to Linsday Lohan.

Joke of the Day

Bob Schieffier on Barry Bonds

Ya, but its a dry heat

Funny clip from the Daily Show about the heat in Baghdad.

Reporter Murdered in Baghdad

We often hear how difficult it is for Western reporters to move freely about Iraq in order to provide their readers with the best picture of what is going on in the war, and as a result all Western news outlets rely upon legions of Iraqi reporters who can move more freely, while acting as interpreters, guides and drivers.

Well, one of these reporters who worked for the New York Times was murdered in Baghdad the other day, his name was Khalid Hassan, he was 23 and the sole bread winner for a large family. If anyone is interested in donating to the fund to help his family out, this is how you do it.

Email

foreign@nytimes.com

subject: fund for Khalid Hassan’s family

Please click on title to be redirected to an article about Khalid Hassan by John F Burns of the New York Times

Joke of the Day

Support for the War, Young America, Victory in Iraq

The History Boys

The great writer/journalist David Halberstam wrote an excellent article about President Bush and his delusionary historical comparisons.

This was his last piece. Please click on title to be followed to the Vanity Fair piece

The Blame Game

Just watched Senator Mccain on CSPAN speaking on the floor of the U.S. Senate about the War in Iraq, and he was making a good point that if the U.S. pulls back to the big bases, Iraq will look like it did back in 2006, with 3000 Iraqi civillians dying every month.

In doing this he referred to the failed strategy of the previous 3 1/2 years as the "Rumsfeld-Casey" plan, referring to the former Secretary of Defense and the former top General for Iraq who over saw the war plans for most of the war up until early 2007.

This was a thunderbolt statement for me, I was blown away when I heard this. Here we have, for the first time, someone high in the Government blaming the military for the failures in Iraq. And McCain to boot. He of the Hanoi Hilton, the infamous POW prison during the Viet Nam War.

I dont know how else one can interpret that statement. He just blamed the top military commanders for the debacle that is Iraq, while of course shielding the politicians from any blame. Mr. McCain ofcourse being a member of the rubber stamp party for Mr. Bush. But McCain says he was opposed to this strategy the whole time. Well John, why didnt you speak up? Why not call for some committee meetings and get to the bottom of what is going on?

Now, after all the deaths, all the bombings, all the IED's, the American people demand real progress, you find your voice? And with that voice, you blame the Generals? Maybe you should have brought a mirror to the floor of the Senate instead of a map of Iraq.

Good NYT article about Iraqi Legislature

Amid the constant car bombings, suicide vest bombings, assassinations, destruction of infrastructure, there is little reporting about the legislature in Iraq. I found this to be one of the most concise portrayals of the tribulations of the Iraqi Council of Representatives.

One telling fact is I learned is that the Council rarely has a quorum, meaning even if there is legislation to be voted on, in cannot by virture of parliamentary regulations.

Check out the article

Joke of the Day

Same Old Tune

The Bush Administration has been employing new language to support its policies in Iraq by stating al-Qaeda is the main obstacle to peace and stability in Iraq, rather than the sectarian wars dividing the country. Thus, based on following the Bush Administration the past four years of the War in Iraq, I believe he has no plans of a significant draw down of U.S. combat forces during the remainder of his presidency.

It seems apparent to me in all the public statements I have heard from U.S. officials concerning the sectarian problems is that they have resigned themselves to the Iraqis figuring that problem out amongst themselves, in their own way, in their own time, on there own terms. We rarely hear from Mr. Bush or General Petraeus about the Mahdi Militia, or the Badr Brigades. This is from the fact the militias have gone to ground for the most part, as well as reports the U.S. is easing off some of the more moderate militias in order to bring them in the political fold.

This is a smart strategy. Talk constantly about terrorists and extremists while ignoring the sectarian bloodshed, the sectarian bloodshed that until several months ago was seen by most Generals in Iraq as the number one enemy. Remember when the militias were enemy number one to the U.S. military? This is not to say al-Qaeda is not, and has not, been one of the main instigators of the most horrific suicide bomb attacks. But since al-Qaeda is not part of the Iraqi Government, while Sadr and Hakim and the myriad of political parties with accompanied militias are, it appears the U.S. has changed its tone in speech and deeds, in the hopes of giving an appearance of peace between the warring factions. This is merely a stalling tactic to buy time, in my opinion.

The “surge” was advertised as necessary to secure Baghdad so the political and sectarian (who can tell the difference?) parties can get some breathing space and come to reconciliation on laws for oil sharing and de-Baathification, that is the returning of many Sunnis who worked for Saddam Hussein, which is the least likely to pass given it means the Shiite cede some control to the Sunnis.

But now, all we hear from Bush and the Generals is that the only enemy is al-Qaeda, when it has been widely reported for most of the war that it is the militias, both Sunni and Shiite, that are killing most of the U.S. soldiers. Indeed, the Generals and politicians alike have been openly revealing the training and equipping by Iran to Iraqi Shiite militias with the most lethal of weapons killing Americans, the explosively formed penetrator, or EFP, which can disable the M1-A1 Abrams tank, the main battle tank for the U.S. military.

The undeniable fact is that the majority of U.S. deaths in Iraq are from driving around and getting blown up. These people that are dying are not even getting a chance to fight, as they are dying sitting down inside an armored vehicle. Does this make any sense? That’s what pisses me off the most about this stupid war. And the vast majority of these bombs are made, planted, observed, detonated, by Iraqis. And what further pisses me off is that the President and Generals never, ever talk about that. Its al-Qaeda this, extremists that, never mentioning the militias planting these bombs just happen to represent the largest block of parliamentarians in the Council of Representatives.

Now the military has apparently focused its main thrust upon finding and destroying the bomb making factories in what the military refers to as the Baghdad “belts,” while attempting to keeping some calm in the sectarian wars long enough to make it appear as if calm and peace has descended upon Baghdad, possibly setting up for large withdrawals of U.S. combat troops.

Yet my gut instinct after observing this President on this issue, the War in Iraq, it is my opinion that the shift in rhetoric and tactics is being done to set up for a long term presence in Iraq, or as long as Mr. Bush is on power. If the main enemy is al-Qaeda, while appearing as if the sectarian bloodletting has abated, he can justify keeping combat forces in Iraq, albeit at smaller numbers.

Despite the recent defection of key Senators such as Richard Lugar, Rep Indiana, and the former Foreign Relation Committee Chair, as well as Pete Dominici of New Mexico, also a long standing Republican, on the strategy and policies of the Bush Administration when it comes to Iraq, there will not be a cut off of funding or precipitous withdrawal. It seems apparent these Republicans would prefer not to have a confrontation with either the Democrats, or the President, when it come to the funding of the troops. These Republicans would like to see the Americans stop being the police force for Iraq, constantly patrolling the streets only to be blown up, while stating they have no confidence in the current Iraqi Prime Minister, his government or the Iraqi security forces.

But recent comments by Senator John Warner, one of the most respected senators and a former Secretary of the Navy during the Viet Nam War, about his regrets on being silent when surge after surge of American forces were sent to Viet Nam without sound policy to back them up, almost as if he wants to make up for past failures when he might have spoken up, could signal the biggest tipping point for the GOP and Iraq.

Just to reiterate the point, there has been no indication from any of the Republican Senators that they would support legislation for the cutting off of funds for troops in the field.

So it is this all al-Qaeda all the time talk is what concerns me there are plans for long-term U.S. combat commitments to Iraq. No matter who is the next President, I believe the Generals will advise some significant troop levels in Iraq to combat al-Qaeda. In this day and age, what President could ignore that type of advice?

Since in the world of politics, all actions and deeds are usually preceded by very well thought out words and statements, it is apparent Mr. Bush is falling back on a tried and worn tactic of blaming everything on al-Qaeda in hopes of returning to his more comfortable black and white world, where the “evil doers” are around every corner.

Gravy Train

President Bush commuted the sentence of the former chief of staff for the Vice President, I Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on the basis that the sentence was "excessive."

This administration continues to put its foot in its mouth when it is entirely unnecessary, just like with the fired US Attorneys. In that case, all they had to do was fire them and not give any reason, instead they said it was for performance, when it was apparently political.

In the Libby case, one would think the lawyers on Mr. Bush's staff would know the sentence was within the Federal sentencing guidelines, and that the majority of perjurers and obstruction of justice criminals go to jail. So why not just pardon him outright and simply say it is the right of the President to do this?

I was also wondering, given the reason the President cited for commuting felon Libby of this prison sentence, how deeply Mr. Bush studied the Federal sentencing guidelines and how many similar cases he researched in order to get an understanding just what is a fair sentence? I noticed he cited no legal precedent for his actions. I would bet there are hundreds of people languishing in prison with similar sentences for similar crimes who would love the same preferential, extra judicial treatment Mr Bush accorded Mr Libby.

The aspect that troubles me the most, is that for the past 16 years, the America people will have had the past two Presidents setting an example that it is acceptable to lie under oath. Isnt that remarkably sad? That some lies are ok, or that lying is not ok, yet punishment for lying is also not acceptable.

Green Zone

To say I am frustrated by the policies in Iraq by the Bush Administration is an understatement. Since I have no confidence in the people that got the U.S. in this mess to get the U.S. out of this mess, I feel it important to remind us of the early days of the occupation.

The differences between then and now are, well, striking to say the least. It is surreal.

Please click on title for a clip from a good book "Imperial Life in the Emerald City"

Colbert at the White House

Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Good listen! He sticks it to everyone!

Please click on title for audio