Quote of the day--on war and peace

"Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -- how passionately I hate them!"  --Albert Einstein

Quote of the day--on war and peace

"Heroism at command, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action. It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder."  --Albert Einstein

What would YOU do?

And after yesterday's insanity of the White House lies, now this

Iraq's oil-fueled surplus could hit $80 billion, report says

The full, original story is here:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/05/iraq.oil/?iref=hpmostpop

How does it feel?

How does it feel, knowing that we're spending ourselves into outageous, history-making debt, as a country, while the country we're occupying--you know, the one we unlawfully attacked and blew up?--is raking in millions of dollars in budget surpluses while our American soldiers are over there, sweating and fighting and dying for them--and for us, sadly?

How crazy is that?

Good God, is there no level of insanity this administration won't reach?

We're there. We're maxed out. Hopefully, it can get no crazier and more insane and illogical than this. This has got to be it.

"Iraq is raking in more money from oil exports than it is spending, amassing a projected four-year budget surplus of up to $80 billion, U.S. auditors reported Tuesday."

Read it and weep.

For all those who "wanted" this war--who supported it and thought it was a good idea--you pay for it. Not American soldiers. And not those of us who were against it before it started.

Who's in charge?

This just out/in from Truthout.org:

http://www.truthout.org/article/maliki-concedes-no-us-withdrawal-deadline

Agence France-Presse reports on the latest agreement between US President George W. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki: "The talks have sputtered over the Baghdad government's demands for a timetable for US troops to withdraw as well as Washington's demands that its soldiers and other staff be immune from Iraqi prosecution."

The fact is--and I hope they know it--the Iraqi government, such as it is, is in control of this Administration, this government, and this nation. Look at the facts: the Bush Administration needs this "government", if that's what it is, to do some things, like form itself, take over it's policing and its military, etc. It needs to be in control. It needs to, figuratively, "step up to the plate". It needs to take control of its borders and its people. So, if it does that, and if it rules and if it controls itself, it also controls what goes on inside its borders, as it should be. That's what governments are for. That's what governments are supposed to do.

But, in the meantime, this pesky US government is trying to tell it what to do inside those same borders. And the fact is, to be a government and to do what it is to do--what it wants to do--to be a Democracy, it doesn't have to be, it shouldn't have to be dictated from the outside, in this case, from the US, about what it's supposed to do.

So here's our problem: we invaded Iraq to "give them" Democracy, with a capital "D". Right. So now they're getting it, and they're exercising their power--or trying to--and what if they don't do what we want them to? What if they want to "zig" when we want them to "zag"?

Dammit, what if they want to be independent of us?

Not a very good return on your investment, is it, W?

But, really, it's going extremely well over there

Yeah, right.

There are so many times, when I read or hear people either from this Administration or believers of this same group, that say how "the surge is working" or whatever nonsense they want us to swallow that day.

And then I read things like this, that tell of actual incidents that occur and I keep in mind how so much of the country--Iraq--has been blown up by this same administration and I just want to scream.



US-Allied Iraqi Politician Kills Two US Troops, Wounds Four
Monday 23 June 2008

by: Mohammed al Dulaimy and Hannah Allam, McClatchy Newspapers

Madain, Iraq - A U.S.-allied Iraqi council member sprayed American troops with gunfire Monday, killing two soldiers and wounding three and an interpreter, Iraqi authorities and witnesses said. The attack occurred minutes after they emerged from a weekly joint meeting on reconstruction in this volatile town southeast of Baghdad.

Raed Mahmoud Ajil, a former high school principal in his mid-40s, was known as a respected city council member and devoted educator who'd recently returned to Iraq after completing his master's degree in India, stunned colleagues said. U.S. troops shot and killed him at the scene.

Ajil's colleagues said they could think of no motive for the deadly rampage, which is thought to be the first incident of a U.S.-allied Iraqi politician carrying out such an attack. Ajil comes from a distinguished Sunni Muslim family. His brother is security chief for the Iraqi Ministry of Justice and a cousin is a high-ranking judge, relatives said.

Ajil's family said that he'd suffered from bouts of depression and sporadic epileptic seizures, which he masked in his role as a public servant. Relatives knew him to be friendly to U.S. troops and said he had no qualms about working alongside them, even though many in this mixed Sunni-Shiite Muslim town view American forces as occupiers.

(McClatchy special correspondent Dulaimy reported from Madain, Allam from Baghdad.)
__________________________________________________________
back to "Mo Rage":

Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died, more than 4,000 Americans have died, thousands and thousands of both Iraqis and Americans have been wounded or are suffering dreadful psychiatric disorders because of and from this war but we're supposed to believe that "the surge is working".

No. No, it's not.

The whole war hasn't "worked". Nothing is as they said it would be and it's not good for Iraqis and it's not good for Americans.

We need to get out.

...and counting...

At least 4,113 U.S. military members have died in Iraq, according to a count by The Associated Press.*



*for link to original information, go here:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h8XNLL64ZdzZlLe0AW2ExTyg0gBwD91K222O0

President Big Oil

As if we needed any more proof that this is the President of, by and for "Big Oil", there's plenty more fresh proof this week.

For starters, the past week saw the 4 big American Oil companies get back oil contracts for and in Iraq. Yeah, no kidding. And they're still going to pretend that this wasn't a war for oil.

Those 4 oil firms haven't been in that country since--get this--1972. Unbelievable. It's almost as though Georgey had a pact and promise with them, that if they helped him steal one or two elections with all their money, that he'd get 'em back in Iraq.

Well, 4,000-plus American soldiers, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and untold billions of dollars later and they're getting their payday. Congratulations all around, boys. You got your big gift.

That and $142.00/barrel oil.

The other thing that's happening just now is that this Administration's lowly Bureau of Land Management--you know, the one that usually just messes up the lives of the Native American Indians--is shutting down the possibility of ANY solar power projects in the country for 2 full years because--get this, this is rich--they're going to do environmental studies on what this could mean to the Southwest.

Isn't that great? It just doesn't get any more ironic and twisted than this.

The Bush Administration is concerned about the environment, for pity's sake. They've "gottn religion" about the environmnet.

If you believe that, I have some swamp land for you to consider.

Let me add--with facts--to the irony and contradiction.

The same BLM is, right now, ADDING STAFF. Seriously.

They're gearing up for--are you ready for this?--all the oil and gas lease applications they've been getting from the same oil companies across this great land of ours.

So they're shutting out the possibility of solar power studies for 2 years but expanding so they can allow firms to look further for FOSSIL FUELS.

Let me point out some obvious sidepoints, like the fact that fossil fuels are what are getting us further into trouble in the Middle East and war and with both Mother Nature and global climate change.

Insane.

So that's where we are. Anyone who tries to tell me this President, his party and this administration didn't go into Iraq for oil has loads of hard facts and proof going against them. It is and always was a war for oil.

You'd think this President would be embarassed, wouldn't you?, by all ths evidence and information that's out there about what he does and what he wants and what he believes in. You'd think he'd even be ashamed but no, not this guy. Money is money and he'll do virtually anything for him and his pals to load up on it.


Post Script:

12 hours after posting the above, I just received the following, from Truthout.org, saying much the same thing:

t r u t h o u t | 06.28

Bill Moyers and Michael Winship | It Was Oil, All Along

http://www.truthout.org/article/it-was-oil-all-along

For Truthout, Bill Moyers and Michael Winship write: "Oh, no, they told us, Iraq isn't a war about oil. That's cynical and simplistic, they said. It's about terror and al-Qaeda and toppling a dictator and spreading democracy and protecting ourselves from weapons of mass destruction. But one by one, these concocted rationales went up in smoke, fire and ashes. And now the bottom line turns out to be ... the bottom line. It is about oil."

(If I even begin to think that I think remotely close to Bill Moyers, I may pass out).

Post, Post Script (bear with me).

My partner sent me this article a couple days ago. It seems we could be on the verge of some terrific and important breakthroughs on and in solar power, if only we can keep "pushing the envelope" of technology and our government will stay out of the way:

Sol Focus: All That Silicon Valley Alternative Energy Investment Bears Some Fruit
Posted by: Carl Alviani on Thursday, June 26 2008
We've been hearing about the boom in alternative energy research in Silicon Valley for a while now, but not so much in terms of actual marketable products. That may be changing, though, if Mountain View based Sol Focus is any indication.

Looking at the history of solar power, one of the biggest obstacles to its broad acceptance and application has been the high cost of manufacturing photovoltaic cells, and the relatively low output. Sol Focus has a solution that they think could revolutionize the industry, and it's so obvious you have to wonder why it took so long. Rather than make a large panel of pricey semi-conductors, they use comparatively cheap aluminum and glass mirrors to concentrate sunlight onto a tiny chip of photovoltaic, both reducing the cost of the unit, and increasing the efficiency of electricity production.

According to the company's website, these dished panels use 1/1000th the active material of a conventional panel, and will produce power as cheaply as conventional (fossil fuel) sources by 2010. As an added bonus, they also look much, much cooler than the typical shiny black slab, offering a gleaming sci-fi gorgeousness that we wouldn't mind on our rooftop one bit.

See the original site here:
http://www.core77.com/blog/technology/sol_focus_all_that_silicon_valley_alternative_energy_investment_bears_some_fruit_10308.asp

Have a great weekend, y'all...

The boy has stupid all over him

Kristol: Bush Might Bomb Iran If He ‘Thinks Senator Obama’s Going To Win'

On Fox News Sunday this morning, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said that President Bush is more likely to attack Iran if he believes Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is going to be elected.

However, “if the president thought John McCain was going to be the next president, he would think it more appropriate to let the next president make that decision than do it on his way out,” Kristol said, reinforcing the fact that McCain is offering a third Bush term on Iran.

“I do wonder with Senator Obama, if President Bush thinks Senator Obama’s going to win, does he somehow think — does he worry that Obama won’t follow through on that policy,” Kristol added. Host Chris Wallace then asked if Kristol was suggesting that Bush might “launch a military strike” before or after the election:

WALLACE: So, you’re suggesting that he might in fact, if Obama’s going to win the election, either before or after the election, launch a military strike?

KRISTOL: I don’t know. I mean, I think he would worry about it. On the other hand, you can’t — it’s hard to make foreign policy based on guesses of election results. I think Israel is worried though. I mean, what is, what signal goes to Ahmadinejad if Obama wins on a platform of unconditional negotiations and with an obvious reluctance to even talk about using military force.

Kristol also suggested that Obama’s election would tempt Saudi Arabia and Egypt to think, “maybe we can use nuclear weapons.” Watch it:

Kristol’s belief that Bush might attack Iran before leaving office is not new. In April, he told Bill Bennett that it wasn’t “out of the question” that Bush would consider such a strike because “people are overdoing how much of a lame duck the president is.”

The claim that Obama’s potential election could force Bush’s hand also isn’t new. Earlier this month, far-right pseudo scholar Daniel Pipes told National Review Online that “President Bush will do something” if the Democratic nominee won. “Should it be Mr. McCain that wins, he’ll punt,” said Pipes.

Both Kristol and Pipes apparently agree with President Bush’s claim in March that McCain’s “not going to change” his foreign policy.

see the entire link here: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/22/kristol-bush-iran/

Bad Moon Rising

More evidence that we all need to pay attention to what's going on. In the past, I've said politically. Now, financially--locally, nationally and internationally.

For several reasons, I do, indeed, think there is at least a "bad moon rising", if not out-and-out financial turmoil coming down the pike, unless I'm mistaken and/or unless we do things differently, and very soon. I usually say the same thing, too, and that is, I hope I'm wrong.

The several things that make me think this are the following:

1) High household debt, per household, here in the States. In fact, it's at record levels, as we've heard for years. (http://www.occ.treas.gov/qj/qj24-1/3-SpecialStudies.pdf)

2) High national debt of the United States: Right now it stands at approximately 9 trillion dollars, and rising fast (thank you, Mr. Bush)(http://brillig.com/debt_clock/);

3) High deficit spending in by the United States due to the Iraqi war and the wide expansion of government, mostly in the past 7 years (thanks again, Mr. Bush) (http://www.deficitsdomatter.org/);

4) The housing crunch in the United States (and really, the world), right now (http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080102/BIZ/801020387&sfad=1);

5) The credit crunch (intertwined with the housing crunch) right now (http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/;

6) Low household savings in the United States (http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2002/el2002-09.html):

7) All the "baby-boomers" about to retire--with all that debt and low savings rate--and the huge costs to the Social Security system on the United States (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200801/aging-boomers);

8) All those same "boomers" having crappy health care coverage, given the state of health care and how weak and nearly non-existent it is here in the States (http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=353);

9) The Medicare and Medicaid systems will both be tremendously burdened by these same "boomers" retiring in all their numbers (http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm875.cfm);

10) The huge expansion of troubles in the American auto industry right now, in part due to the housing and credit troubles but also due to the extremely high prices of oil and the lack of competitiveness of the American automakers (http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/06/gm-death-watch.html) and, finally,

11) The extremely high and really, explosive cost of oil internationally. This speaks for itself and drives up the cost of virtually everything, either in manufacturing and/or the delivery of those same goods (http://www.wtrg.com/prices.htm).

Given all these factors, it seems like, virtually, the "perfect storm" for financial calamity, frankly. Honestly, I don't think the Great Depression of the 30's and 40's had this much going for it's creation, so many years ago.

I hope I'm just getting old and crotchety and all these things aren't really such a big deal after all.

But I don't think it's just me. I think I'm right about all this and, again, hope I'm wrong.


(As a side note, for an important, brief but poignant article on another aspect of our collective futures, go to this link:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91681112. It also has the original audio interview it came from.)

I've wanted to put this up for a long time

Check this out

Did you know that your own--our own--government, the United States government, is paying--yes, paying--Iraqis, regularly, "in exchange for not fighting" in Iraq?

If not, then, do you know how may Iraqis we are paying to not fight?

It's hard to believe.

91,600 Iraqis.* Regularly.



Thank you, once again, George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and all others involved and responsible.

Good plan, guys.

*Harper's Magazine, June, 2008, P. 15 (Multi-National Force, Iraq, Baghdad)

Another of many reasons why you, the American people, need to know what your government is doing

US Seeking 58 Bases in Iraq, Shiite Lawmakers Say

http://www.truthout.org/article/us-seeking-58-bases-iraq-shiite-lawmakers-say

Leila Fadel, of McClatchy Newspapers: "Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed 'status of forces' agreement that will allow US troops to remain in the country indefinitely. Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties said in a series of interviews the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another US demand that would have effectively handed over to the United States the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq. Lawmakers said they fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran."

From www.truthout.org. Check it out.

Another sign...

Another sign that this Bush Administration is, for all intents and purposes, over with:

First, really, this has been a lame duck administration for some time--at least since last Fall's elections.

And then, this last week, rocket-scientist Scott McLellan's book came out--you know, the former Press Secretary for this knuckleheaded President--in which he really pretty much trashes the same administration for creating this war, arbitrarily and wrongly, just as we've known all along--but he puts it on paper, in his book. Sure, he shoud have spoken up at the time, when the wrong was being done but at least he's coming out now and straightening some things out and telling some truths.

So here it is--another example of how the country and maybe the world is moving on from this administration. Next weekend, the new Adam Sandler movie "You Don't Mess with the Zohan", shows that we've moved on from making terrorists and terroism the big, unknown thing to only fear. This administration used the "terrorist" and "terrorism" in all their forms, to create fear in the American public, so they could get what they want and rule with abandon.

Now, this new movie boils terrorists and terrorism down to a joke--a thing to be ridiculed and laughed at. Anyone who knows about fear and the manipulation of large groups of people knows that you can only get away with that manipulation for so long. After so much time, your foundation of fear gets put out of mind, really.

What this boils down to is that terrorists, terrorism and the use of either to create fear and, therefore, power over us, and, indeed, the Bush Administration itself, have all "jumped the shark". It's all over for all of them.

Unfortunately, the damage is already done.

American soldiers are still in harm's way and they're still sacrificing--and dying--even if it is in--thank God--smaller numbers.

Still, we're that much closer to the end of the nightmare called the Bush Presidency.

Thank God (if there were one).

Now we just need to repair the damage and heal the nation and the world.

No small job.

More of what "W" has wrought

Army suicides reported up again — at 108

By Pauline Jelinek, Associated Press Writer 16 minutes ago

The number of Army suicides increased again last year, amid the most violent year yet in both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Two defense officials said Thursday that 108 troops committed suicide in 2007, six more than the previous year. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the full report on the deaths wasn't being released until later Thursday.

About a quarter of the deaths occurred in Iraq.

The overall toll was the highest in many years, and it was unclear when, if ever, it was previously that high. Immediately available Army records go back only to 1990 and the figure then was lower — at 102 — for that year as well as 1991.

The 108 confirmed deaths in 2007 among active duty soldier and National Guard and Reserve troops that had been activated was lower than previously feared. Preliminary figures released in January showed as many as 121 troops may have killed themselves, but a number of the deaths were still being investigated then and have since been determined to have resulted from other causes, the officials said.

Suicides have been rising almost steadily during the five-year-old war in Iraq and nearly seven-year-old war in Afghanistan.

The 108 deaths last year followed 102 in 2006, 85 in 2005 and 67 in 2004.

The increases come despite a host of efforts to improve the mental health of a force stressed by long and repeated tours of duty. Increasing the strain on the force last year was the extension of deployments to 15 months from 12 months, a practice that is being terminated this year.

More U.S. troops died in hostilities in 2007 than in any of the previous years in Iraq and Afghanistan. Overall violence increased in Afghanistan with a Taliban resurgence and overall deaths increased in Iraq, even as violence there declined in the second half of the year.

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press.

Article from Yahoo just now

"Veterans' burials nonstop at cemeteries"

Think about that the entire Memorial Day weekend.

And for any- and everyone who voted for George W. Bush once or twice, and/or supported this goofy-assed idea of a war, you're welcome to accept the responsibility for it, too.

"The scene at the Ohio Western Reserve National Cemetery is repeated nationwide more than 100 times a day. Military veterans are being buried at such a rapid rate that national cemeteries use heavy equipment to make room."

Think about it.

More importantly this weekend, let's all think about what we can do to support our troops and get out of Iraq and this war.

You can see the entire article at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080524/ap_on_re_us/100_burials

I see where the "Current Occupant", in his weekly radio address, asked all Americans to "keep Vets in mind" this Memorial Day weekend.

That's rich.

The way his administration took them into this war so more than 4,000 could die and so the others, who are wounded, could be neglected and/or mistreated by his own Veteran's Administration? US keep the Vets in mind?

How about "W" keeping them in mind?

How about "W" getting them out of his hair-brained, illegal, groundless, baseless war?

Now THAT would be keeping the Vets in mind.

We all owe it to ourselves--and the Vets--to read this article. Sure the Vets dying are, for the most part, from previous wars but it's the ones in harms way now to whom we owe thought and commitment.

For some background and information, go to the following link to read the 10 reasons by there is a group Iraq Veterans Against the War (see links on the right of this page): http://ivaw.org/faq.

There should be no better source for information and reasons why we should get out of Iraq than taking it from the very soldiers who have fought or are fighting this absurd, ugly war.

From a local guy--and the Kansas City Star

An important article from the Kansas City Star today, by a General at Fort Leavenworth, who served in Iraq in the last few years:

Missed Signals from Iraq Resulted in Wrong Responses, Retired General Recalls

By Scott Canon
The Kansas City Star

FORT LEAVENWORTH | Premature declarations of victory ultimately doomed the Iraqi occupation to lost opportunities, a former commander of U.S. troops there said Friday.

Ricardo Sanchez, a retired Army lieutenant general whose Iraq command stretched through the first year after the invasion, told more than 1,000 mid-career officers that Washington’s expectations of good news blotted out drearier reports coming from Baghdad in 2003 and 2004.

“We honestly believed what we had been told — that we’d be greeted as liberators,” Sanchez said in a 90-minute talk to students at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth.

So when Sanchez and others began reporting that a deadly and powerful insurgency was brewing in the country, and that Iraqis saw Americans as occupiers, not saviors, he said, the Bush administration was slow to accept the reality. That, in turn, meant troops ill-equipped and poorly trained for the burgeoning insurgency.

So at the very time when the military needed more armor and counterinsurgency expertise, he said, the White House wanted symbols of success.

Sanchez, on a tour to promote his memoir, cited as a chief example the turning over of sovereignty to a disorganized Iraqi government before it was ready to assume power.

He said unreal expectations also prompted a retrospectively foolhardy overreaction to the killing of four Blackwater security employees in Fallujah in 2004.

Seared in the public consciousness, the burning and hanging of two of the bodies off a bridge was “tactically insignificant,” Sanchez said. Yet it created political pressure to show that U.S. troops were not just sitting ducks.

When the subsequent offensive in Fallujah turned out to be bloodier than expected and threatened to tilt the 2004 U.S. elections, Sanchez said, the White House ordered a retreat.

In his book, Wiser in Battle, published last week, he said he refused because it would have given the enemy a resounding victory while putting his troops in unreasonable peril as they withdrew from the city under fire. He threatened to quit.

That won him a compromise, he said: The U.S. offensive would halt, but there would be no retreat.

Resigning, he said in an interview after Friday’s speech, would have been a perilous turning point, putting “our mission at much greater risk.”

Such a public rebuke of the President Bush and then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld by a field commander would have been “a tumultuous situation at the highest levels of command (putting) a question in the mind of the soldier on the battlefield.”

Sanchez’s book has drawn varying reviews — lauded as a frank look at the tension between military commanders and the White House, and criticized as being self-serving.

In The Washington Post, reviewer Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations wrote that Sanchez “is so busy castigating erstwhile colleagues that he never stops to wonder if he might have erred.”

In the book, Sanchez took some responsibility for the abuses of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison. Yet, he said Friday that the scandal’s seeds were planted in 2002 when the administration decided some terror suspects were not necessarily protected by the Geneva Conventions. Consequently, Sanchez said, abusive interrogation techniques became commonplace and accountability for abuses fell apart.

Bush was focused on the war, attuned to its difficulties and supportive of the military, Sanchez said in his interview. But he said the president “does not impose his will.” For instance, he said Bush was slow to demand action in Fallujah.


And then this quote, from a sign on a poster a lady held in a picture in that same newspaper today:

"Blind faith in bad leadership is not patriotism."

Obvious but important to say.

Have a great weekend, folks. American soldiers are still out there, fighting and dying in your name, for your oil.

Keith Olbermann gives good advice to Pres. Bush

From Keith Olbermann on his show, "Countdown", last evening, giving this advice to President George W. Bush:

"This last piece of advice. When somebody asks you, sir, about Democrats who must now pull this country back from the abyss ... about the cooked books and fake threats .. about your gallant, self-abnegating sacrifice of your golf game ... shut the hell up!"

Way too late but still nice to hear.

Go to the following link to see the whole special comment:

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=96473

And now this...

Headline from 19 minutes ago:

Ex-Government Officials Say the Bush Administration Ignored Iraq Corruption

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer

Get the whole story at this link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080512/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq_corruption



Okay, folks, let's get this straight:

They lied to us about why we should go over there;

They lied to us about why we should attack a sovereign, foreign nation WHICH IS AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW;

They lied to us about the "enemy" having weapons of mass destruction, and it's been proven;

They lied about "winning", prematurely;

They lied to us and to themselves about it being a "fast" war (we're going into our seventh--yes, that's seventh--year);

They lied to us about this being a "cheap" war (we're at ONE-HALF A TRILLION DOLLARS now, and still counting);

They lied to us about not losing very many soldiers (we're over 4,000);

They didn't have a plan for the country once they created their power vacuum;

They blew up the country--and continue to do so;

We are now rebuilding same country--THAT WE BLEW UP;

They've given away millions of sweetheart deal contracts;

They didn't compete these same multi-million dollar contracts;

They've literally HANDED OUT millions of dollars in COLD HARD CASH (yeah, there's a good idea, huh?);

They cannot prove that Iran has been supplying arms, in large quantitities, to Iraqi insurgents;

and just generally screwed everything up for the last 7 years and now this--proof positive that this same Bush Administration IGNORED multi-million dollar corruption by the officials in Iraq that we're supposed to be helping and who are supposed to be helping us rebuild their country.

You gotta' be kidding me.

If you were either the bad guys--who want us there to kill us--or the good guys--who want us there so they can take our money--WHY WOULD YOU WANT THE US TO LEAVE??

Oh, yeah, great plan, George. You just keep outdoing yourself.


News flash: John McCain wants to continue on this "path of progress."

(Bang head on wall here).

I'm going to end today's post with a quote from the end of this same article by Senator Byron Dorgan, Head of the Democratic Policy Committee--and then a question: "It is a cruel irony if we are appropriating money next Thursday or did appropriate money last month or last year and that money ends up actually providing the resources for an insurgency in Iraq which ends up killing Americans," said Dorgan, D-N.D.

So the question is, WHY AREN'T YOU ANGRY AND DOING SOMETHING ABOUT THIS?

This week's count

24 more American soldiers died this week.


24.



At what point does the American public pay attention?



At what point do we change this?



How many is it going to take?