Robot Monkeys

After 5 years of Iraq and 7 years on Afghanistan, the war is played out.

So why am I supposed to take the MSM seriously again?

U.S. Major Gen. Antonio Taguba (Ret.):

There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes. The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account.

Sorry Tony. There’s no question of that either. They won’t be.

What should happen is that the International Criminal Court should issue an arrest warrant, and then the principles: George W, Cheney, Rummy, John Yoo, Scooter Libby, and the whole lot, should be arrested as soon as they step off the plane in a foreign country. Hell, Interpol should take a page out of their playbook and perform an “extraordinary rendition” and arrest them here.

Hell! Why the hell isn’t the Berkley city council ordering the Berkeley PD to arrest John Yoo at his office at 890 Simon Hall? I’ll tell you why. Because unlike the fucking Berkeley Nuclear Free Zone, this would actually achieve something, and hippies aren’t about achieving real change. They’re all about “sending messages” and forming drum circles and raging against the war machine and what not. Just not achieving real change.

Aaron David Miller is tonight’s (June 2, 2008) guest on Charlie Rose. He argued that America could not leave Iraq because of the Pottery Barn Effect. We broke it, and so we’re responsible and have to stay. Because if we don’t we’ll lose face. (To his credit he did admit that this was the Vietnam argument.) He also admitted that we may never be able to “fix” it. So in essence he was arguing throwing good money after bad.

That isn’t a solution. That’s dumb. That’s an argument that only someone with nothing at risk can make. It’s also the argument of a weakling.

I don’t pretend to know the Great Secrets™ of life, but I have learned two things:

1. Everyone is a bit insecure, and scared of being discovered as a fake.
2. Nike was right. “Just do It.”

That second one is a powerful idea. It’s a subversive idea. I don’t think about it a Nike slogan, I think of it as what I believe is a quote from Václev Havel, even though I can never find it. “If you want to live in free society. Then act like you do.” Havel was in out of prisons for being a political dissident. Every time he was released, he wrote a new play, and would be sent right back in. Why? Because writing plays against communism is not illegal in a free society. People’s power comes from other people ceding it to them.

People always believe that they can’t do something. There’s always a risk, and the vast majority of time the real risk is not even close to what we believe it is. Do it. Deal with the immediate consequences and the move on. It’s not, not caring. It’s not being paralyzed. Just say, “Fuck this shit,” and move on. You’ll feel better.

Reward for al Qaeda in Iraq leader, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, now $5,000,000 $1,000,000 $100,000.

I find this incredibly bizarre. It’s as if he’s a stock, and his price fluctuates. If he plans some more car bombs, does the price go back up? Probably not. Part of me suspects that this is part of a move by the administration to whitewash Iraq. “We’re making progress! The reward for Abu Ayyub al-Masri went down! He’s not as valuable! Of course this is simply an arbitrary value assigned by fiat, but don’t worry your pretty little head about that. It’s not like we’d ever manufacture a story, and then cite it in order to deceive anyone! We’re making progress; that’s all you need to know.”

3 trillion dollars

Makes me think of Eisenhower

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.

This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.

It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals.

It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement.

We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.

We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.

Or to bring it back to Iraq:

Three trillion could have fixed America’s social security problem for half a century.

Rolling Stone blasts the Dem “Leaderishp.”

Nothing many of us didn’t already know, but it’s still nice to see it in print.

During the Florida Republican debate, Tim Russert asked the candidates if they were going to still argue for the war even though 60% of the people are against it.

The most cogent statement was from Giuliani when he pointed out that Hillary was for the war right up until a majority of the people turned against it. Of course he was trying to use his steadfastness for this midlife crisis war was a good thing.

McCain actually talked about “winning” versus “surrendering.” What exactly does “winning” mean John? What does “victory” look like? I honestly have no idea what it would look like in Iraq, and even less what a victory over global terrorism would. It’s a canard.

Romney tried to say that Iraq was a threat, and that war was worth it because of 9/11.

Huckabee implied the war was about 9/11 and even said that we still don’t know whether or not Saddam had WMDs. We do Huck.

I hate them all. Except for Ron Paul. He’s the only one that apparently still believes in causality.

No, I hate Ron Paul too, just not about the war.

Hillary won Nevada. She’s leading in all the Super Duper Tuesday states. She’s the nominee.

Goddamn it.

I put it it 50-50 that Obama is the veep nom. I don’t know who it would be if it wasn’t him, but I could easily see her not picking him. As I said, Obama will be wasted as a warm bucket of spit, but he’ll take should take the offer if it’s given. Better to be “Vice President Barack Obama” than “The Junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama.”

Obama’s only hope is that Edwards would somehow remain viable enough to grab delegates and then pledge them to him, but that won’t happen. Edwards wouldn’t pull such a trick; and more importantly, he’s no longer viable.

Hillary won’t bring the troops home. That bitch voted to kill 4,000 and wound – many severely – 28,000 more because she thought it was politically expedient. She didn’t want to look “weak.” Instead, she wanted to look just as stupid and warmongering as the Republicans.

Goddamn her.

She knew the vote was for war. It was obvious. Now she’s trying to say, “But I didn’t think they’d actually go to war! I was trying to threaten war!” If that was truth, she’s a goddamn fool that shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the government. She doesn’t have the judgement to be trusted with even picking up the damn trash.

The whole war from the beginning didn’t make any sense. All of a sudden Iraq was now supposably “a clear and present danger.” Why? Nothing changed in 10 years. And for the antimultilateralists and antiinternationalists to all of a sudden talk about having to “save the UN from irrelevancy” was laughable. And she either bought into it, or was so fearful for her own political aspirations, jumped on the bandwagon and hit the war drum.

Fuck you Hillary.

She won’t bring the troops home. There’s no doubt in my mind about it. Oh she might bring some home, but at the end of four years, there will still be thousands there. I’ll say 10,000 to 20,000 still there. She won’t pull them home because, just like that tragic son of a bitch, LBJ, she doesn’t want to look weak. Democrats have to show they’re just as willing to throw lives away on fool’s errands as the Republicans. Women have to not only show that they’re willing to kill young boys just like men, but in fact, they have to show that they’re more willing to kill in order to prove they’re not weak.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, it will all be in a quest to win over those that believe that she killed Vince Foster in a crack cocaine fueled satanic lesbian orgy.

Fuck you Hillary. And fuck you America for making have to vote for this damn foolish bitch in November.

I fear that Hillary is going to sew up the nomination on Super Duper Tuesday.

Nothing like voting for someone who voted to kill thousands of young American men and women, maim thousands more and god only knows how many Iraqis because she thought it was politically expedient.

3,926 and counting.

I never thought that going into Iraq was a wise decsion, but I did think that once we were there we had to make the best of it and do what it takes to succeed. That is, our only option was total commitment. However, a year later, it is clear that this administration is unwilling to totally commit to success in Iraq. Don’t misunderstand me. They wish to succeed, but they appear to be unwilling to do what it takes to succeed.

Prior to the invasion Gen. Eric Shinseki suggested 250,000 - 300,000 troops would be needed to secure postwar Iraq, but the administration felt that his estimate was a gross over-estimate, and proceed with approximately half as many. A year later, with the security situation worsening in Iraq, it is clear that was a mistake. Rumors have it that Powell recently authored a memo to the president urging for an increase in the American, British, and Iraqi troop levels. It is unlikely that this request will be fulfilled.

First, there are not enough well trained, well equiped Iraqi troops to fill the void. Iraqi volunteers are becoming harder and harder to come by. The majority of the troops we do train are uncommitted, ineffective, and often desert. Furthermore, as the recent suicide bombing inside the army base at Mosul revealed, the Iraqi volunteer army is penetrated with the very insurgents we’re trying to defeat.

The British people do not now, nor did they initially, support the deployment of British troops to Iraq. With the British election season looming, and Tony Blair’s political future in doubt, it is unlikely Blair will bolster the British contingent. Nor, is it likely any other member of the “coalition of the willing” will radically increase their troop commitment. If anything, we can expect that the smaller members of the coallition will reduce or even completely eliminate their commitment, as seen with the Philippines.

The United States can’t deploy that amount of forces without massive draw downs from strategic locations worldwide (i.e. Korea), or even larger and longer deployments of National Guard and Reserve units. These resource pools are already dwindeling. This leaves only one option remaining, the dreaded draft. The military is against it because the introduction of conscripts will hamper effectiveness both in the short term, and in years to come. The administration is against it, because the reintroduction of the draft would be politcal suicide. While the security situation in Iraq may at some point warrant a draft, the lack support both politically and militarily leaves its prospects dim.

The president has told us to expect things to get worse, possibly much worse, in Iraq. Almost every month. the number of American killed and injured that month, increases from the number the previous month. The military is unable secure city districts, key transportation routes, and vital infrastructure. This inability causes the insurgents to become more emboldened and brazen with their attacks.

While no WMD was found in Iraq, rendering the entire pretext for the war at best, moot, and at worst, suspect; we have achieved some goals. A brutal tyrant has been deposed and now faces trial for his crimes, and Iraq is now taking the first steps towards elections and democracy. Worthy and admirable achievements all around.

The elections in January won’t change the situation in Iraq. No more than the “return of sovereignty” or the capture of Saddam did. It will mark the completion of the last achievable milestone, though. Yes, the creation of a self-sufficent Iraqi military has been touted as the last milestone, but as I said previously, there are serious doubts about its achievability.

We can’t stay in Iraq forever. If even after the January elections, and the formation of the all Iraqi government, Iraqis still do not take affirmative steps for their own security and government stability, it will fall to us to do so. To paraphrase a previous president about another war: we can not, and should not, ask American boys to fight and die for an Iraqi government, when it’s Iraqi boys who should be doing the fighting and the dying.

If this becomes the case, what would happen to American national security if we were to completely militarily withdraw from Iraq? Forget straw man claims of “Then the terrorists would have won.” That means nothing. I’m talking in concrete terms. What’s the most probable worst case scenario, and how would this make us less secure at home? Are the stakes really as high as we would be led to believe?

Let’s say, Iraq falls into bloody civil war and splits into three ethnically dominate countries? Who cares? As long they’re killing each other, they’re not killing us. A more disturbing outcome would be al-Zarqawi, or someone like him, sets his terrorist shop in Fallujah, or Mosul, or even then Green Zone. If a genuine threat would emerge, what prevents us from simply bombing the hell out of the city, or sending in enough troops to kill or capture him, and then leave. Sure this would violate Iraqi sovereignty, and stir up a hornets’ nest of trouble in Iraq, but would this strategy make us less safe in the United States?

Someone tell me why we can’t just declare victory and go home in Iraq.