I fully realize you can't list all the responses you will get
regarding the Iraq war, but lest you miss one I have placed in another thread, I am adding it here. It seems difficult for the anti-war element in the Democratic party to make
plans for the middle east cauldron of violence we would
leave in our wake, but when the Persian Gulf is closed off
because we let terrorists thrive on either side of it, the time
to keep our troops out of enormous harm's way will be lost
forever. Why in the world would we want ourselves tarred and feathered with having precipitated such an outcome?

Below, then, find a countervailing analysis to that of John
Murtha et al from someone who goes back all the way to
Roosevelt. I would be delighted to debate anyone in the
Congress or the Democratic leadership, and am more than
confident that I would provide them all with much food for
thought.

from 50 states post

I value the comments of those who responded to my post.

My stance is equally pro peace, but it is also pro security,
and I continue to wonder why no one can come forth with
a plan telling us how we will secure the Persian Gulf that
is the source for 40% of the world's supply of oil.

It would be nice if we were not so dependent on oil. But at
the moment, we are, and should Iran gain control of Iraq
after we leave, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how
they can make the Strait of Hormuz impassible. What do
readers think would happen then to the price of oil? Or
do we think we can get some extra from Hugo Chavez who
himself has overtly formed an alliance with Iran?

I'd be delighted to pull out of Iraq if someone can explain
how the above scenario would not occur. My issue with
the current rabid drive to 'end the war' and 'bring our troops home,' is that in the real world, they would not come
home. Rather, the stage would be set for them to at some
point have to go into the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian
Gulf to liberate it from Iran, at horrendous cost of life.

I also have concerns that people point to polls, which have
limited validity, and claim that all of a sudden the people
of this nation want to 'end the war.' If we were winning the
war, the poll numbers would be different. In point of fact
they were, when three years ago it was perceived that we were winning. So one can at least conclude from last Nov.
election, that what the American people want is to win the
war not lose it. Nor is Petraeus just another General in a
line of Generals Bush rejects until he gets one to his liking.

Petraeus has in fact rewritten the book on waging a war of
counterinsurgency. We are finally getting more troops
instead of having too few, and reversing the appalling error
of clearing, then leaving the given city or neighborhood.
Now they are clearing and staying. Will it work? Those
who are fed up clearly don't think so, but as I say, it is a
matter of common sense to give it a chance.

I might add that we did not get into the war solely on the
basis of WMD. We in fact had fighter planes sectioning off
the country for years, while inspections took place. During
that time, Saddam started paying thousands of $ to the
families of the Palestinian suicide bombers, thus ensuring
that the Israeli Palestinian conflict could not be resolved.

It is widely agreed that the middle east cannot have peace
until the Israelis and Palestinians do [see the analysis of
fmr Senator George Mitchell who is universally respected on
this matter]. This is why many regarded Saddam himself
as a 'weapon of mass destruction' without whose removal
peace could not even have begun to have a chance.

So it's pointless to argue that we got into the war simply
because we were lied to. It's equally pointless to argue
that sanctions should have been given more time, as the
record shows they were collapsing under the weight of all
those who wanted lucrative dealings with Saddam, which
nations included of course, Russia and France.

I submit that should we be so distracted by what will
ultimately be a fruitless attempt to legislate time frames
for withdrawal, we will be then horrendously unprepared
to deal with the day that Iran detonates its first nuclear
weapon, and begins an era of blackmail that will change
our lives forever.

It's long past time for the Democratic Party be a party of
problem solving, rather than one of simplistic anti war
rants, that leave everyone wondering what our plans are
when indeed we withdraw our troops from Iraq, only to
find we have to send them into harms way, with far greater
loss of life.

Look squarely into the eyes of today's 16 year old high school students, and make the effort to describe exactly how we should anticipate that the Persian Gulf will look like when they, in only two years, become of age to go to the next phase of war that no one wants to talk about.

Ask the European Union's Henry Solano - exhausted after four years of fruitless diplomacy with Iran trying to get them to stop their nuclear program - if he thinks further 'diplomacy' will be anything more than becoming enablers for Iran's 'rope a dope' policy in dealing with the EU, US, and UN.

And then ask if we have any plan at all to keep the peace and our economies intact in the face of the obvious threat from Iran, the primary sponsor of terror in the middle east.

The harsh reality is that there is no candidate for President either Republican or Democrat who, at this time, has such a plan. Rather they seem to be content with gaming the race as if we were watching a Broncos - Patriots playoff game, pandering to public opinion as presented by polls that themselves are highly subject to the ‘rant of the day,’ -- thus becoming self fulfilling predictions and conclusions that alleviate the need for serious thought or analysis. I hope each member of both parties, particularly our elected officials, will read this and respond to the challenge it presents.

There's space here to post such a plan, and no one would like to read it more than I would.

But at
the moment, we are, and should Iran gain control of Iraq
after we leave, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how
they can make the Strait of Hormuz impassible.

personally, sorbonne, I think this rhetoric is nothing more than a page out of the Neo-con, PNAC handbook, to excuse this prolonged occupation of Iraq. Shall we hold the Iraqis hands the rest of their lives? When will we think they can stand on their own feet, when they will not even try with the US there doing it for them? It is far past time to cut the umbicile cord, and make them stand up for themselves.

And SHOULD your theory happen and Iran manage to just waltz in and take control of Iraq and have both of the countries' oil to blackmail and threaten with, do not forget, That is THEIR life blood. US is one of the largest customers and to cut off our supply would be to cut off their own noses. Maybe raising the prices, would finally force this country to get serious about alternatives. It costs a lot more per gallon in Canada and europe than it does here already. Maybe people with gas guzzlers will take another look at smaller vehicles.

Bottom line is we should never ever have allowed this President to get us into this mess in the first place. As soon as we get rid of him, maybe some diplomacy and round table compromise and negotiations and respect will bring back some stability and peace.

"Bottom line is we should never ever have allowed this President to get us into this mess in the first place."

he did not just break, but obliterated the pottery rule...overplayed the 911 terror card...go it alone swagger...miscues an occupation... attacks & slanders those who question or oppose...cherry picks intelligence reports... honesty goodbye, welcome the lies... and more lies... the why? no answer, speculation only. with that said, a plan?

yep, what should have been done a long time ago, bring in the middle east. they will be most affected by any permanent iraq... that does include, shall i say syria, iran. afterall, if england invaded mexico, would we not want a say. stretch you say? well then we do not understand the middle east nor human history. taken a poll lately? how popular are we (of course GWB is much less). our standing in the world? try sending GWB on a goodwill tour. be prepared to reimburse those countries for the mass riots and mayhem he'll create... says a lot doesn't it. enough said.

And of course we aren`t interested in the oil! Let`s get a Democratic white house so we can start moving this country in the right direction! Alternative energies in real earnest not photo ops and then forget about it.Remember Katrina which is now being turned into a white neighborhood!Enough said the trail is endless.

sorbonne at last a voice of reason. do not waste it on this site. this group of individuals are caught up in the game of
poke and run. The Democratic members of Congress want to place blame and run from real work. I wonder where there outrage was before November 06? They act like they just WOKE up and realized they had a job after the election.
Good Luck trying to convince them that the resolution for war they voted for had more than WMD on the page. Like bad children at Daycare, they weren't paying attention when they voted for it. If they spent as much time considering the crisis of terroism as they spend on OUTRAGE that a President can fire Presidential appointed attorneys they still wouldn't understand.

pointless

Here's another chance to share your thoughts about the Iraq war. Iraq Virtual Town Hall Meeting
Virtual Town Halls” to hear from 2008 Presidential candidates on the issues MoveOn members say are most important: Iraq, health care, and energy. On April 10th. MoveOn members are asking candidates the tough questions about their Iraq plans, and we're gathering in living rooms from coast to coast to hear the answers directly. Then we’ll talk together, and the next day, all MoveOn members will vote on who we think will do the best job in Iraq. It's a personal audience with the people who want our support, our time, our money, and eventually our votes. You'll want to be a part of this. Click on link below for complete details:

http://pol.moveon.org/event/events/index.html?action_id=80

The Senate passed historic legislation that calls for a phased redeployment for our troops in Iraq while ensuring they have the support they need. It's an important first step in ending the war in Iraq. But President Bush has threatened to veto the bill. The American people have had enough of the president's failed strategy in Iraq. Join Hillary in telling him to listen to the will of the people and to Congress, withdraw his veto threat, and begin phased redeployment of the troops out of Iraq. Please sign the petition to help end the war. Simply click on the link below:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/action/iraq

It's time to end this vicious war to plunder the oil resources of the Iraqi people. America should not sign a Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) with Iraq. America's children should not die to protect the interests of the oil companies. American taxpayers should not have to pay what is in essense a monstrous subsidy just so oil companies can plunder Iraqi oil.

The Complicity of Congress in a Criminal War

by Richard W. Behan

The US Congress has gone beyond compliance with George Bush’s illegal war, and is now technically an accomplice-it is assisting with full knowledge in the perpetration of a crime. Congress has attained this status through two grave errors, one of omission and one of commission.

The Error of Commission

The Iraq Accountability Act passed the House as H.R. 1591 and slightly differently as S. 965 in the Senate. The versions await reconciliation in conference committee. Both bills set deadlines for troop withdrawal, both appropriate the money the President requested for prosecuting his war, and both require the Iraqi Parliament to pass its “hydrocarbon law,” to enable the sharing of oil revenues among the Iraqi people.

Revenue sharing surfaced publicly when President Bush announced his troop surge initiative on January 10. It was one in a series of mandatory “benchmarks” he established for the Iraqi government to meet. “To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country’s economy,” Mr. Bush said, “Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis.” On the surface that is a benign, compassionate thing to do for a war-torn people.

As usual, it seems, Mr. Bush was consciously deceiving us. He failed to tell us the whole truth. The Iraqi hydrocarbon law also privatizes 81% of Iraq’s currently nationalized petroleum resources, opening them to “investment” by Exxon/Mobil, Chevron/Texaco, and two British oil companies, BP/Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell. (For further details, see Joshua Holland, “Bush’s Petro-Cartel Almost Has Iraq’s Oil.”) These companies expect to sign the rarely used and notoriously profitable contracts called “production sharing agreements” which guarantee them extraordinarily high profit margins: they might capture more than half of the oil revenues for the first 15-30 years of the contracts’ lifespan, and deny Iraq any income at all until their infrastructure “investments” have been recovered.

So the Iraqi people will share among themselves all the revenue from 1/5th of their country’s oil reserves. But they will get only a fraction from the remaining 4/5ths, where the American and British oil companies expect to generate immense profits. (Read more in Crude Designs, Greg Muttitt, ed., a report by the UK’s Platform Group.)

This outcome has been on the Bush Administration’s agenda since it took office in 2001, and it is the reason we went to war. (For substantiation, see http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/47489/?comments=view&cID=516389&pID=516158 . See also The State of War, by James Risen, Bob Woodward’s State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III, and The Greatest Story Ever Sold, by Frank Rich. )

The broad contours of oilfield privatization and the use of production sharing agreements (PSA’s ) were shaped five years ago in George Bush’s State Department, part of a policy-development project called “The Future of Iraq.” This was a year before the invasion. Afterward, Paul Bremer’s Coalition Provisional Authority embedded privatization and PSA’s into the emerging structures of Iraqi governance, aided by the intense lobbying in Baghdad by the four oil companies. The hydrocarbon law, written originally in English, was eventually translated into Arabic and formally confirmed by Prime Minister Maliki’s cabinet early in 2007. It awaits passage now by the Iraqi Parliament, few members of which know much of its content and virtually none of whom were involved in writing it.

President Bush, then, is commanding the Iraqi Parliament to enact a law that was drafted first in President Bush’s State Department. It requires Iraq to engineer the foreign capture of its own oil.

And Congress has agreed to this. That is complicity.

Was Congress ignorant of the consequences of the deceitful “benchmark?” No. Representative Dennis Kucinich offered an amendment to eliminate it from H.R. 1591. In a letter to his Democratic colleagues, Mr. Kucinich said, “By…requiring the enactment of this law by the Iraqi government, Democrats will be instrumental in privatizing Iraqi oil.”

And so they were. With Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate, the benchmark survived-essentially a prescription for theft.

The theft, however, is unlikely to take place. The war is at the point of stasis; privatizing the oil is in peril, because passage of the hydrocarbon law is increasingly remote. The law is a metaphor for the heinous sectarian strife which George Bush’s invasion unleashed, and is now shattering the country and its culture. If the Iraqi minorities cannot agree to stop killing each other, they are unlikely to agree on the disposition of their country’s crude oil. But the recognition of Bush’s thievery is growing in Iraq every day, and if the minorities can agree on anything at all, they will see their common advantage in assuring the hydrocarbon law is stillborn. There is talk of that now.

For Congress to abet an illegal war that cannot succeed is not only criminal, but bewildering in the extreme. There is no visible rationale for remaining in Iraq.

The Error of Omission

Invading Iraq was a textbook example of “the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, or political independence of another state.” That is the formal United Nations definition of military aggression, and a nation can choose to launch it only in self-defense. Otherwise it is an international crime.

The Bush Administration justified the invasion explicitly in terms of self defense. They linked Saddam Hussein directly to the terrorism of 9/11 and suggested further strikes were a near-certainty. Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, Ms. Rice, and Mr. Rumsfeld told us Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, the means to deliver them, and the motivation to do so. They said the evidence was irrefutable.

But the evidence was refuted and refuted again. Nothing they said was true.

President Bush’s most egregious lie was not about weapons of mass destruction. It was his lie about the war’s purpose. He told us it was about security at home and spreading democracy in the Middle East: it was a “war on terrorism.”

That has been refuted repeatedly as well. The war was about oil, and here is how it began.

Six months before 9/11 Vice President Cheney’s Energy Task Force was scrutinizing maps of the Iraqi oilfields and documents about its nationalized industry. (See them at http://www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oil-maps.shtml .)

The Task Force concluded the Persian Gulf would be the “focus” of US international energy policy.

At about the same time, the National Security Council gave clarity to the word “focus.” At its very first meeting, the NSC shelved the long-standing priority for Middle East foreign policy-settling the conflict between Israel and Palestine. The Council would henceforth attend to the invasion of Iraq instead. “Focus” was defined. The ends were the Iraqi oilfields; the means would be war. (The relevant books to see here are Ron Susskind’s The Price of Loyalty, Richard Clarke’s Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror, and Elizabeth de la Vega’s detailed history and formal indictment in U.S. v. Bush.)

The collapse of the Trade Towers six months later gave the Bush Administration an appalling alibi to proceed with the planned invasion. Richard Clarke’s book explains the determination of President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld to attack Iraq directly and immediately. But the route would go through Afghanistan first, and a “war on terror” theme became the ingenious deception, to disguise the eventual seizure of Iraqi oil.

The success of the deception can be measured today by the infrequency of encountering the truth. The “war on terror” is still the unwavering story George Bush and Dick Cheney tell, in a campaign of propaganda to demonize “radical Islam.” (Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda .) In conduct and effectiveness what they do is strikingly parallel to the program Joseph Goebbels pursued in Nazi Germany, to demonize Judaism. (For more parallels between the Bush and Nazi regimes see “How Will History Treat George Bush?“. The “terrorism” story continues to resonate with most of the Republicans in Congress, not a few Democrats, and a great many American people who have yet to encounter-or admit-the truth.

The mainstream press has been derelict in its unwillingness to challenge the propaganda. The literature exposing the truth elsewhere, however, is truly voluminous and rigorously persuasive, both in contemporary books and in the endless informational resources of the Internet. The sources span the political spectrum. One of the most damning books is Crude Politics: How Bush’s Oil Cronies Hijacked the War on Terrorism. It was written with intelligence and understated outrage by Paul Sperry, whose politics are far to the right of center.

Congress is aware of the first small lie about Saddam Hussein’s terrifying weaponry and savage antipathy. But it seems unable to acknowledge the far more significant lie about the war’s purpose, and fails even to conduct a serious inquiry into it. This serious error of omission allows the criminal war to continue unchecked.

Congress meanwhile addresses the summary dismissal of 8 US attorneys, casually ignoring the greatest Presidential malfeasance in our history.

The US Congress is surrounded by a mountain of evidence of impeachable offenses, but insists “impeachment is off the table.” To citizens recalling their high school classes in civics and U.S. History, that is intolerable. It seems to violate the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution every member of Congress has taken.

Restitution

The Congress has three compelling and immediate opportunities to expiate its disappointing behavior. Striking the revenue-sharing “benchmark” entirely from the Iraq Accountability Act. Mandating immediately the early, prudent, and orderly withdrawal of American troops from a criminal and unwinnable war. Then impeachment.

Richard W. Behan lives and writes on Lopez Island, off the northwest coast of Washington state. He is working on his next book, To Provide Against Invasions: Corporate Dominion and America’s Derelict Democracy. He can be reached at rwbehan@rockisland.com. (This essay is deliberately not copyrighted: it may be reproduced without restriction.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org

ruthi wrote:

sorbonne at last a voice of reason. do not waste it on this site. this group of individuals are caught up in the game of
poke and run.

The facts are plan and simple - Bush lied and we went to war. The reasons why we stay have changed so many times that the American people no longer know why we're still there nor do they care. They want out. We won the election and kicked you Repubilcans out. We will get out of this mess on out terms,not yours or Bush's, like it or not. Bush/Cheney are nothing more then figure heads of a country that they have almost destroyed. I would encourage you to stop watching Fox News and learn the truth. You will be a much happier person.

Pulling out of Iraq now isn't the right solution. Honestly we truely destroyed that country, so now we have to rebuild it. Saddam's tyrrany may have been great, but things are worse now for the Iraqis than they were before. Families blown to bits, school children lying dead on the street, only remnants of actual lives is what the Iraqi citizens have now. This country elected a president (TWICE!) that got us into this ridiculous situation but since we chose that, we now need to pay for it. Iraq needs to be rebuilt just as Germany and Japan needed to be after WWII. We destroyed it, now rebuild it. No matter how much it costs. Let's regain our integrity in the world, and be known for building not destruction. The Iraqi citizens are people. They need a safe place to survive and live happily. now that we got involved this far it's our duty to insure that they get what we promised when we went in.... "liberty, freedom and life without tyranny". somehow I don't believe that's what they have now.

My husband served a year in Iraq '05-'06. He is now going back in June for another year after being home for only 10 1/2 months. He was proud to serve his country, but in a war that is stretching our Army so thin that soldiers spend more time at war than at home, I say we need a change. We did what we can there; sacraficed enough American lives. Now the Iraqis need to step up and we need to take our soldiers out of combat roles and into support roles, and bring as many troops as we can back home. The american people have spoken and it is time that President Bush listens to us.

"The american people have spoken and it is time that President Bush listens to us."

unfortunately, he will not. he even avoided the commissions recommendations.

compound this with american taxpayer footing the bill while george's benefactors/donators/political buddies were given no bid contracts to reap the monetary. i've said it before and will say it as often as i can. GWB's buddies should be donating heavily to the families that lost loved ones, to those maimed for life, and even assisting families with expenses while their loved ones are serving, and do it without being asked to. that's the american spirit. yet, don't count on it.

in the meantime, i hope all our finest receive the recognition they earned and know americans do stand behind the troops... vs the this misadm that obliterated the pottery rule, misrepresentsed aka cherry picking intelligence to send our finest in without adequate materials nor support, over extended stays, nor rehab care as needed upon return as worthy as what george and dick would receive. and, let me add... how many of bush's and cheney's kin have or will volunteer to serve? enough said.

i am saddened when i hear a family must be split again for this bush adventure... may your husband be safe and hope very soon this quagmire ends... may the demos have the backbone to continue to confront this absentee bar stool national guard who avoided service and his 5 deferement vp. better yet, send both to iraq. both need a taste of what they escaped... then maybe they'll understand diplomacy is the best solution. and let me end on this note...where's osama, george and dick?

parting comments to my long ramble above... now that saddam is long gone, it's apparent the problem isn't. flowers at the feet of our finest...walk the streets without an escort mr mccain?

What we did was deplorable. We invaded a country that was no threat to us. We destroyed their infrastructure and killed over 600,000 at least of their people. It is one of the most shameful moments in our country's history.

Let some of the Iraqi bloggers tell you about the things they have seen.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/866

Riverbend compares Iraqi deaths, and an intelligent educated Iraqi father mourns his son...and what used to be.

These are the kids that the Bush administration hit with the "targeted" pay raises. His justification being that "They were being paid commensurate with others their age."
These are the kids who are being given less than honorable discharges instead of treatment for PTSD.
These are the kids who are being forced to wait around, ignored by the system before they are given discharges for their disabilities.
These are the kids who are being made to jump through hoops after their discharges to get the Veterans' benefits they earned.
These are the kids who are being failed by an underfunded and overstretched Veterans' Administration.
Support our kids, Bush won't!
Stop the War of Lies!

"Is there anyone out there with balls to stop this madness that Bush has created? Anyone?"

unfortunately for this country, our allies, and iraq, it does appear that GWB is once again, politically successful... he played the support the troops card (eventhough he never supported the troops). he has regained his footing and the demos have folded. The repubs will now toe back in line, and the demos will be marginalized.

bottom line... the voters spoke, bush didn't listen and still played his pat hand, and the demos folded aka "Is there anyone out there with balls to stop this madness that Bush has created? Anyone?" no, nope, none, nobody, no one.

Congress has an obligation to impeach Bush and Cheney. Not to do so is a crime in itself. It is time for term limits of twelve years in Congress, combining serving in both houses. The presidency already has an 8 year term limit. The Supreme Court should be limited to 10 years with one new justice appointed and one leaving every year. Too much corruption in our government. Oaths to uphold the Constitution mean nothing to any of them. This Oil War must stop now. Soldiers dying so Halliburton and Oil Companies can make obscene profits. Outrageous!

There is a problem. Iraq Bush has been all about the war and not worrying about the counrties problems.I praise the job that the democrats are trying to do in the Congress. Bush needs to be impeached. Every day that we say longer another of our soliders are being killed for no reason at all.

The world has watch the US (bush and cheney) screw up Iraq. I praise Democrats in Congress for what they are doind. Bush and cheney has got to go they are going to veto all of the bills that go against his plan.

This war began on a lie - WMD. Lies told by President Bush. Lies. Five years later and where are those WMD? His lies have caused thousands of lives. He's made widows and has orphaned children. All based on his lies.

How about some truth?

As suggested by a number of people, the Iraqi people are entitled by the virtue of their democracy to vote on whether the US troops should stay or leave. If such a referendum were drafted and voted on by special election, Iraq will assert its sovereignty and begin to stand on its own by their choice. President Bush has painted himself into a political corner by which his only choice to save face is to "stay the course" and deny the Iraqi people a choice in their destiny.

Interesting article in the NYT this morning.
It's titled "Army is Cracking Down on Deserters"
The article talks about how the number of courts-martial for AWOL and desertion has risen sharply in the last four years.
The chickenhawks of the Bush administration lead by the Deserter-in-Chief is kicking soldiers out of the military with less than honorable discharges for offenses which previously were given non-judicial punishment.
One of the things that came out during the news reports on the Ft Carson mistreatment of PTSD soldiers was that they have been given Less Than Honorable discharges instead of treatment for their PTSD.
A Less Than Honorable discharge means that the soldier is denied veterans' benefits. It means that they cannot go to a Veterans' Administration facility to get their PTSD treated.
How many of these cases are soldiers suffering with PTSD?
The hypocrisy and lack of compassion of out military deserter Chickenhawk in Chief keeps showing up in his continued abuse of the soldiers who stepped up, not once but three, four, in some cases even five times.
In the meantime, we are loosing dedicated, senior NCOs who are not re-enlisting.
Our military is loosing its backbone and becoming a hollow entity.
When is this abuse and hypocrisy going to be brought to a halt by our Congress?
INVESTIGATE! IMPEACH!! INDICT!!!

AL-QAEDA IS A SUNNI DOMINATED, NON-NATION, WORLD-WIDE POLITICAL IDEOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION THAT EVEN HAS OPERATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

1) EVEN IF IRAQ, IRAN, AND SYRIA WERE TO BE TOTALLY ANNIHILATEDAND/OR "DEMOCRATIZED", AND OSAMA BIN LADEN WAS KILLED/CAPTURED, THE AL-QAEDA MOVEMENT WILL STILL EXIST IN THE REST OF THE WORLD. THE LEADERS WILL JUST CHANGE. LOOK AT THE IDEOLOGIES OF NAZISM, ANTI-SEMITISM, RACISM, ETC...TO SEE THAT EVEN WHEN THE LEADERS ARE DESTROYED, THE MOVEMENT REMAINS AS CAN BE SEEN BY THE EXECUTION OF IRAQI SUNNI SADDAM HUSSEIN, YET THE IRAQI SUNNIS ARE STILL FIGHTING.

2) SAUDI ARABIA IS A MONARCHY, NOT A DEMOCRACY, AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (U.S.A.) HAS FRIENDLY POLITICAL TIES WITH THAT NATION WHO IS OFFICIALLY STILL AT WAR WITH ONE OF OUR CHIEF ALLIES, ISRAEL. A CLEAR DOUBLE-STANDARD.

3) IT IS IRONIC THAT W.M.D. AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS, INCLUDING AL-QAEDA, ARE NOW REALLY IN IRAQ AFTER, I REPEAT, AFTER THE WAR, OCCUPATION, AND EXECUTION OF SADDAM HUSSEIN, ETC...

4) IF IRAQ IS "DEMOCRATIZED", SHI'ITE AL-SADR WHO IS MORE POWERFUL THAN SHI'ITE AL-MALIKI WILL TAKE OVER POWER AND THE U.S.A. MILITARY IS JUST A POLICE FORCE IN IRAQ WHERE THE IRAQI SHI'ITES AND IRAQI SUNNIS HAVE FOUGHT ONE ANOTHER FOR OVER 1,300 YEARS SINCE THE DEATH OF MUHAMMED'S GRANDSON. THUS, HOW LONG WILL THE U.S.A. POLICE IRAQ THAT IS COSTING MANY AMERICAN LIVES, LIMBS, TAXPAYER MONEY AND MANY CAUSALTIES TO THE IRAQIS?

5) THE IRAQI SHI'ITES, THE MAJORITY OF ISLAMIC PEOPLE IN IRAQ, WANT US OUT AS WELL AS THE SUNNIS AND KURDS.

6) THE U.S.A. IS STILL IN IRAQ DUE TO THE BUSINESS FOR BUSH AND CHENEY AND THEIR LEGACIES.

7) WITH OVER $100 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR FOR THE IRAQ OCCUPATION, WHY DO SOLDIER WHO BECOME INJURED FACE ATROCIOUS MEDICAL TREATMENT AND BUREACRATIC HURDLES TO RECEIVE THE BEST MEDICAL CARE POSSIBLE FOR RISKING THEIR LIVES FOR OUR COUNTRY (DESPITE BUSH'S DUBIOUS WAR) AND SURVING ATTEMPTS AT THEIR LIVES WHEN CORPORATIONS LIKE HALLIBURTON, BECHTEL, ETC...RECEIVE MULTI-BILLIONS OF US TAXPAYER MONEY AND DONATE THAT TO PEOPLE LIKE FORMER C.E.O. OF HALLIBURTON V.P. CHENEY TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THE 1990'S?

8) OSAMA BIN LADEN IS FROM SAUDI ARABIA AND A SUNNI, AS MOST OF AL-QAEDA, THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11 WHILE BUSH WAS PRESIDENT, AND ONLY IRAQ AND IRAN HAVE MAJORITIES OF ISLAMIC SHI'ITES WHO DESPISE THE ISLAMIC SUNNIS. THEREFORE, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THEY WILL REMAIN IN IRAQ AFTER THE U.S.A. RE-DEPLOYS AND WITHDRAWS FROM IRAQ WITH THE SHI'ITES IN CONTROL OF IRAQ AS THEY WILL FEAR THEM AND THEIR ACTIONS AS CAN BE SEEN BY THE MANNER IN WHICH THE IRAQI SHI'ITES EXECUTED IRAQI SUNNI SADDAM HUSSEIN.

IRAQ UPDATE

THERE ARE 2 HOT SUMMERS IN IRAQ, 2 MAJOR FALL ISLAMIC HOLIDAYS, AND SHI’ITE AL-SADR TO START FIGHTING WITH THE SUNNIS AND AL-QAEDA BY 11/2008:

AL-QAEDA IS A SUNNI DOMINATED, NON-NATION, WORLD-WIDE POLITICAL IDEOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION THAT EVEN HAS OPERATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (U.S.A.).

1) EVEN IF IRAQ, IRAN, AND SYRIA WERE TO BE TOTALLY ANNIHILATEDAND/OR "DEMOCRATIZED", AND OSAMA BIN LADEN WAS KILLED/CAPTURED, THE AL-QAEDA MOVEMENT WILL STILL EXIST IN THE REST OF THE WORLD. THE LEADERS WILL JUST CHANGE. LOOK AT THE IDEOLOGIES OF NAZISM, ANTI-SEMITISM, RACISM, ETC...TO SEE THAT EVEN WHEN THE LEADERS ARE DESTROYED, THE MOVEMENT REMAINS AS CAN BE SEEN BY THE EXECUTION OF IRAQI SUNNI SADDAM HUSSEIN, YET THE IRAQI SUNNIS ARE STILL FIGHTING.

2) SAUDI ARABIA IS A MONARCHY, NOT A DEMOCRACY, AND THE U.S.A. HAS FRIENDLY POLITICAL TIES WITH THAT NATION WHO IS OFFICIALLY STILL AT WAR WITH ONE OF OUR CHIEF ALLIES, ISRAEL. A CLEAR DOUBLE-STANDARD.

3) IT IS IRONIC THAT W.M.D. AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS, INCLUDING AL-QAEDA, ARE NOW REALLY IN IRAQ AFTER, I REPEAT, AFTER THE WAR, OCCUPATION, AND EXECUTION OF SADDAM HUSSEIN, ETC...

4) IF IRAQ IS "DEMOCRATIZED", SHI'ITE AL-SADR WHO IS MORE POWERFUL THAN SHI'ITE AL-MALIKI WILL TAKE OVER POWER AND THE U.S.A. MILITARY IS JUST A POLICE FORCE IN IRAQ WHERE THE IRAQI SHI'ITES AND IRAQI SUNNIS HAVE FOUGHT ONE ANOTHER FOR OVER 1,300 YEARS SINCE THE DEATH OF MUHAMMED'S GRANDSON. THUS, HOW LONG WILL THE U.S.A. POLICE IRAQ THAT IS COSTING MANY AMERICAN LIVES, LIMBS, TAXPAYER MONEY AND MANY CAUSALTIES TO THE IRAQIS?

5) THE IRAQI SHI'ITES, THE MAJORITY OF ISLAMIC PEOPLE IN IRAQ, WANT US OUT AS WELL AS THE IRAQI SUNNIS AND KURDS AND THE ENTIRE ARAB WORLD.

6) THE U.S.A. IS STILL IN IRAQ DUE TO THE BUSINESS FOR BUSH AND CHENEY AND THEIR LEGACIES.

7) WITH OVER $100 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR FOR THE IRAQ OCCUPATION, WHY DO SOLDIERS WHO BECOME INJURED FACE ATROCIOUS MEDICAL TREATMENT AND BUREACRATIC HURDLES TO RECEIVE THE BEST MEDICAL CARE POSSIBLE FOR RISKING THEIR LIVES FOR OUR COUNTRY (DESPITE BUSH'S DUBIOUS WAR) AND SURVING ATTEMPTS AT THEIR LIVES WHEN CORPORATIONS LIKE HALLIBURTON, BECHTEL, ETC...RECEIVE MULTI-BILLIONS OF US TAXPAYER MONEY AND DONATE THAT TO PEOPLE LIKE FORMER C.E.O. OF HALLIBURTON, V.P. CHENEY TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN THE 1990'S?

8) OSAMA BIN LADEN IS FROM SAUDI ARABIA AND A SUNNI, AS MOST OF AL-QAEDA, THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11 WHILE BUSH WAS PRESIDENT, AND ONLY IRAQ AND IRAN HAVE MAJORITIES OF ISLAMIC SHI'ITES WHO DESPISE THE ISLAMIC SUNNIS. THEREFORE, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THEY WILL REMAIN IN IRAQ AFTER THE U.S.A. RE-DEPLOYS AND WITHDRAWS FROM IRAQ WITH THE SHI'ITES IN CONTROL OF IRAQ AS THEY WILL FEAR THEM AND THEIR ACTIONS AS CAN BE SEEN BY THE MANNER IN WHICH THE IRAQI SHI'ITES EXECUTED IRAQI SUNNI SADDAM HUSSEIN.

APRIL 10, 2007 IRAQ UPDATE:

16 killed in Iraqi suicide bombing
By SINAN SALAHEDDIN, Associated Press Writer
Also Tuesday, the U.S. military announced the deaths of four U.S. soldiers — three killed by a roadside bomb in Baghdad and another killed in combat in western Anbar province.
The three were killed Monday by a roadside bomb and a secondary explosion while on patrol in a southeastern section of the Iraqi capital, the U.S. military said in a statement.
The unit had been conducting raids against militants in the area, and had recently captured five suspects, it said.
Another U.S. soldier was killed the same day while conducting combat operations in Iraq's western Anbar province, another statement said.
At least 3,285 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count. The figure includes seven military civilians.
His comments came a day after tens of thousands of Iraqis took to the streets of two Shiite holy cities, demanding that U.S. forces leave their country. The massive rally, called for by rebel cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, marked the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad.
Al-Sadr, who remains in seclusion and did not attend, ordered up the march as a show of strength not only to Washington but to Iraq's establishment Shiite ayatollahs as well.
He issued a statement Sunday calling on his Mahdi Army militia to redouble efforts to expel American forces and for the police and army to join the struggle against "your archenemy."

APRIL 8, 2007 IRAQ UPDATE:

10 U.S. troops die in Iraq; 6 on Sunday
By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 57 minutes ago
BAGHDAD - The powerful Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr ordered his militiamen on Sunday to redouble their battle to oust American forces and argued that Iraq's army and police should join him in defeating "your archenemy." The U.S. military announced the weekend deaths of 10 American soldiers, including six killed on Sunday.
Iraqis flock to city for anti-U.S. protest
By Khaled Farhan

Four American soldiers were killed in attacks south of Baghdad on Sunday while another two died from wounds suffered in operations north of the capital, the U.S. military said.
The toll makes it a deadly weekend for American troops after four soldiers were killed in an explosion near their vehicle in Diyala province north of Baghdad on Saturday.
A car bomb killed 17 people and wounded two dozen in the town of Mahmudiya south of Baghdad, officials said, in the latest attack outside Baghdad since a new U.S.-backed security plan took effect in the capital.
A suicide car bomb also killed seven people in Baghdad.
Sadr, who has been keeping a low profile, called on his Mehdi Army militia and Iraqi security forces to stop fighting in the volatile city of Diwaniya and stop playing into the hands of U.S. forces who he said had stirred up civil strife.

APRIL 7, 2007 IRAQ UPDATE- 3274

By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer
On Sunday, the military said four American soldiers were killed in an explosion near their vehicle in Diyala. The soldiers, who died Saturday, were all assigned to Task Force Lightning.
Another soldier was also wounded in the attack, and evacuated to a U.S. military hospital, a military statement said. The victims' names were withheld pending family notification.
North of the capital, in the increasingly dangerous Diyala provincial capital of Baqouba, police reported finding 21 more bodies dumped in the streets, victims of the intense sectarian warfare. All were shot execution-style and many had been tortured. At least 62 bodies have been found in or near Baqouba since Tuesday.
APRIL 6, 2007 IRAQ UPDATE

By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer
The four British soldiers — including two women — were killed Thursday as the American military announced the deaths of eight more U.S. soldiers since Tuesday.
One U.S. soldier died and two were wounded in a roadside bombing Thursday in restive Diyala province north of Baghdad, the military said. Four others died Wednesday in two roadside bomb explosions in southern Baghdad and north of the capital, while a fifth was killed by small-arms fire in the eastern part of the city. Two other soldiers were killed by small-arms fire on Tuesday — one in eastern Baghdad and another on foot patrol in the southern outskirts of the capital.
Also Thursday, the U.S. military confirmed an American helicopter carrying nine people had been downed south of Baghdad and that four were injured.
An Iraqi army official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of security concerns, said the helicopter went down after it came under fire from anti-aircraft guns near the Sunni insurgent stronghold of Latifiyah, 20 miles south of Baghdad. The U.S. military did not confirm that account.
It was the ninth U.S. helicopter to go down in Iraq this year. The U.S. military has studied new evasive techniques, fearing insurgents have acquired more sophisticated weapons or have figured out how to use their arms in new and effective ways.
By LEON E. PANETTA
Published: April 4, 2007
In seeking support for the so-called surge and the supplemental spending bill, the Bush administration argues that American forces have to provide temporary stability to enable the Iraqi leaders to negotiate political solutions. True, but after a while this becomes an excuse for inaction on the political reforms that are essential to stability itself.
This is why the Iraq Study Group report made clear that “if the Iraqi government does not make substantial progress toward the achievement of milestones on national reconciliation, security and governance, the United States should reduce its political, military or economic support for the Iraqi government.”
Whether one is for or against the war, the key to stability is to have an Iraq that, in the words of the president himself, can “govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself.” Achieving that goal is largely dependent on the political reforms that Iraqi leaders have promised but failed to put in place in their country.
As a member of the Iraq Study Group, I found that every military commander we talked to felt that the absence of national reconciliation was the fundamental cause of violence in Iraq. As one American general told us, if the Iraqi government does not make political progress on reforms, “all the troops in the world will not provide security.”
The Iraqis promised to achieve, by the end of 2006 or early 2007, the approval of a provincial election law (so far, no progress); approval of a law to regulate the oil industry and share revenues (while the Council of Ministers has approved a draft, it has yet to be approved by the Parliament); approval of the de-Baathification law to reintegrate officials of the former regime and Arab nationalists into public life (no progress); and approval of a law to rein in sectarian militias (no progress).
By March, the government promised to hold a referendum on constitutional amendments (no progress).
By May, the prime minister committed to putting in place the law controlling militias (no progress); the approval of the amnesty agreement (no progress); and the completion of all reconciliation efforts.
By June, the Iraqi government promised to hold provincial elections (no date has been set).
As for security issues, things are not going much better. The Iraqis have increased security spending over 2006 levels as promised, but they are falling behind on the number of battle-ready Army units.
By April, the Iraqis want to take over total control of the Iraq Army (not likely based on current progress).
By September, the Iraqis want to be given full civil control of all provinces (to date they control 3 of 18 provinces).
By December, the Iraqis, with United States support, want to achieve total security self-reliance (too early to tell, but does anyone really find this likely?).

BUSH ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION: FIGHT THIS IF POSSIBLE

Bush bypasses Senate to name ambassador
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer Thu Apr 5, 5:43 AM ET
President Bush named Republican fundraiser Sam Fox as U.S. ambassador to Belgium on Wednesday, using a maneuver that allowed him to bypass Congress, where Democrats had derailed Fox's nomination.

The appointment, made while lawmakers were out of town on spring break, prompted angry rebukes from Democrats, who said Bush's action may even be illegal.
Recognizing Fox did not have the votes to obtain Senate confirmation in the Foreign Relations Committee, Bush withdrew the nomination last week. On Wednesday, with the Senate on a one-week break, the president used his power to make recess appointments to put Fox in the job without Senate confirmation.
"It's sad but not surprising that this White House would abuse the power of the presidency to reward a donor over the objections of the Senate," Kerry said in a statement.
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said he plans to ask the Government Accountability Office to issue an opinion on whether the recess appointment is legal.
Recess appointments are intended to give the president flexibility if Congress is out for a
lengthy period of time,
such as the four-week adjournment in summer.
But Dodd said the law was
not intended to circumvent lawmakers' approval.
"This is really now taking the recess appointment vehicle and abusing this beyond anyone's imagination," said Dodd, a candidate for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. "This is a travesty."
Bush also used his recess appointment authority to make Andrew Biggs deputy director of Social Security. The president's earlier nomination of Biggs, an outspoken advocate of partially privatizing the government's retirement program, was rejected by Senate Democrats in February.

APRIL 5, 2007: WATCH THE “SURGE” TRENDS

Ten British, US troops killed in Iraq
by Jennie Matthew 24 minutes ago
BAGHDAD (AFP) - Six American and four British soldiers were killed in separate attacks in Iraq, coalition forces announced on Thursday, as Britain prepared to transfer security of another province to local troops.
Official: U.S. copter goes down in Iraq
By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer 2 minutes ago
BAGHDAD - The U.S. military confirmed that an Army helicopter went down south of Baghdad, and reported all nine aboard survived; four were reportedly wounded. The helicopter came under fire Thursday in a Sunni militant stronghold south of Baghdad, an Iraqi army official said.
BUSH IS LOSING HIS TEMPER AND INSULTS=APPEARING ARROGANT
MR. KISSINGER STATING THAT IRAQ SHOULD NOT BE PARTISAN IS CORRECT. YET, HE IS NOT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT PRESIDENT BUSH REFUSES TO NOT BE PARTISAN WITH A DEMOCRAT CONGRESS AS CAN BE SEEN EVEN BY THE FACT THAT CONGRESSWOMAN PELOSI, 3RD IN LINE FOR THE PRESIDENCY, WAS AMONG 3 DEMOCRATS VISITING SYRIA AND BUSH CONDEMNED THEM, YET DID NOT WHEN 3 REPUBLICANS DID THE DAY BEFORE. BUSH IS FORCING DEMOCRATS INTO CONFRONTATIONS AS HE WILL NOT COMPROMISE AS HE PAINTED HIMSELF INTO A POLITICAL CORNER BY THE “AXIS OF EVIL” (IRAQ, IRAN, AND SYRIA) PHRASE THAT IS FOOLISH, JUST LIKE REPUBLICAN REAGAN CALLING THE FORMER U.S.S.R. “THE EVIL EMPIRE.” THESE ARE POLITICAL SUICIDE PHRASES FOR DIPLOMACY REASONS.

THE U.K. WAS WISE TO WAIT FOR THE FREEDOM OF THE 15 SAILORS AS THE IRANIAN LEADER AND HIS POLITICAL PARTY FACES ELECTIONS (THAT IS WHY HE UTILIZED ISLAMIC AND CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS TO “MORALLY” JUSTIFY THE RELEASE AS RELIGIONS ARE MORE POWERFUL THAN PATRIOTISM REGARDING IDEOLOGIES). THE WHOLE IRAQ AND MID-EAST QUAGMIRE WAS PRECIPITATED BY THE ALLIES. IF THE U.K./USA, ETC…WOULD HAVE BOMBED IRAN AND CREATED MUCH CARNAGE, NOT ONLY WOULD THIS HAVE ESCALATED IRAQ AND INFLAMED 1.5 BILLION ARABS, THE 15 BRITISH SAILORS WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED.

THE USA HAS FRIENDLY RELATIONS WITH MONARCHY SAUDI ARABIA, SIMULTANEOUSLY; ISRAEL AND SAUDI ARABIA STILL ARE OFFICIALLY AT WAR WITH ONE ANOTHER.

ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER OLMERT REALIZES THAT FOR MID-EAST PEACE, HE HAD TO MAKE A PEACE OVERTURE TO THE SAUDI ARABIAN KING FOR A REGIONAL PEACE EFFORT THAT MUST INCLUDE SYRIA AND THIS WILL ASSIST TO ISOLATE AL-QAEDA. YET, AN ATTACK AGAINST IRAN AND/OR SYRIA WOULD HAVE AUTOMATICALLY DESTROYED AN HISTORIC OPENING FOR MID-EAST PEACE AND ISRAEL MUST LEAVE GAZA, OR ALL EFFORTS WILL FAIL AND OBVIOUSLY THIS INCLUDES THE ARAB NATIONS RECOGNIZING ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO EXIST.

1) WHY ARE NOT THE ALLIES IN NON-ECONOMIC NATIONS (SUCH AS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN DARFUR) FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES?
2) WISDOM SAYS THAT NATIONS BEING “TRIGGER HAPPY” INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON THE OBJECTIVE AND HOW TO ACHIEVE SUCCESS WITH MINIMAL DAMAGE IS THE KEY TO PEACE.
3) WISDOM SAYS THAT THE U.S.S.R. COMMUNIST IDEOLOGY WAS EVENTUALLY BROUGHT DOWN DUE TO DECADES OF INCREASING EXPOSURE TO THEIR POPULATIONS TO WESTERN CULTURE.
4) WISDOM SAYS THAT SINCE THE EXPOSURE TO CULTURE HAS PROVEN SUCCESSFUL IN AVOIDING A NUCLEAR WAR, AND THAT KUWAIIT YOUTH, AN ARAB NATION THAT BORDERS IRAQ, AND EVEN IN ARAB IRAN, ARE BECOMING MORE WESTERNIZED AND LESS EXTREMIST, THAT THIS IS THE WISE OPTION. THIS TAKES MORE TIME, YET WILL SUCCCEED FAR FASTER THAN “COLD WAR” STRATEGIES BECAUSE NO PEOPLE DIALOUGE=PEOPLE AND POLITICAL FAILURE AT EVERY LEVEL, ALWAYS HAS, AND ALWAYS WILL.

PLAN TO PURSUE

1) STAY WELL-TUNED TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC SENTIMENT.
2) IGNORE BUSH, “LOYAL BUSHIES,” ETC…THAT STATE THE OPPOSITE
3) REPUBLICANS WILL LIE TO GET ELECTED AND DISTORT FACTS. EXPECT AND PLAN FOR “FEAR AND SMEAR”
4) STAY VERY FOCUSED AND CORE UNITED ON IRAQ
5) IT IS NOT A GAMBLE: SEE THE POLLS AND IRAQ WILL WORSEN

Here are some of the other findings:
• 82 percent say the world is becoming more dangerous for the United States and its people, with 48 percent saying “much more dangerous.”
• 73 percent say the United States is not doing a good job as a leader in creating a more peaceful and prosperous world, with 34 percent saying it has done a “poor” job.
• 68 percent believe the rest of the world sees the United States negatively, with 34 percent saying “very negatively.”
• 61 percent say America’s safety from terrorism does not depend on success in Iraq, and 70 percent say its troops should leave within the next 12 months (19 percent say immediately).
• 84 percent say “initiating military force only when we have the support of our allies” should be important to our foreign policy, with 51 percent saying “very important.”
The survey was based on telephone interviews with 1,013 adults between Feb. 21 and March 4. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

April 2nd, 2007 12:48 am
AP Exclusive: Kissinger says military victory not possible in Iraq
Associated Press
TOKYO: Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who helped engineer the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam, said Sunday the problems in Iraq are more complex than that conflict, and military victory is no longer possible.
He also said he sympathizes with the troubles facing U.S. President George W. Bush.
"A 'military victory' in the sense of total control over the whole territory, imposed on the entire population, is not possible," Kissinger told The Associated Press in Tokyo, where he received an honorary degree from Waseda University.
The faceless, ubiquitous nature of Iraq's insurgency, as well as the religious divide between Shiite and Sunni rivals, makes negotiating peace more complex, he said.
"It is a more complicated problem," Kissinger said. "The Vietnam War involved states, and you could negotiate with leaders who controlled a defined area."

April 3rd, 2007 3:01 am
Three U.S. soldiers killed in combat in Iraq
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Three U.S. soldiers were killed in combat in Iraq on Monday, the U.S. military said on Tuesday, bringing the U.S. death toll since the March 2003 invasion to 3,256.
One of the soldiers was killed and three were wounded when a large truck bomb exploded outside a police station in the northern city of Kirkuk. Two Iraqi policemen and 10 civilians were also killed.
MCCAIN IS DELUSIONAL AS WELL AS REPUBLICANS, BUSH, ETC…ON IRAQ

BAGHDAD - After a heavily guarded trip to a Baghdad market, Sen. John McCain insisted Sunday that a U.S.-Iraqi security crackdown in the capital was working and said Americans lacked a "full picture" of the progress. The U.S. military later reported six soldiers were killed in roadside bombings southwest of Baghdad.
Four soldiers were killed responding to the blast that killed the first two, the military said. Britain, meanwhile, announced that one of its soldiers had been shot to death in southern Iraq.
McCain, a Republican presidential hopeful who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam, acknowledged a difficult task lies ahead in Iraq, but criticized the media for not giving Americans enough information about the recent drop in execution-style sectarian killings, the establishment of security posts throughout the city and Sunni tribal efforts against al-Qaida in the western Anbar province.
"These and other indicators are reason for cautious, very cautious optimism about the effects of the new strategy," said McCain, who was leading a Republican congressional delegation to Iraq that included Sen. Lindsey Graham.
McCain, R-Ariz., was combative during the news conference, refusing to respond to a question about whether the U.S. had plans to attack Iran. He also replied testily to a question about remarks he had made in the United States last week that it was safe to walk some Baghdad streets.
"Things are better and there are encouraging signs. I've been here ... many times over the years. Never have I been able to drive from the airport, never have I been able go out into the city as I was today," he said.
"I'm not saying 'mission accomplished,' 'last throes,' 'dead-enders' or any of that. It's long and it's hard and it's very, very difficult," he said. "I believe that the signs are encouraging, but please don't interpret one comment of mine in any way to indicate that this isn't a long, difficult struggle."
Members of the delegation spoke at a Green Zone news conference after they rode from Baghdad's airport in armored vehicles and under heavy guard to visit the city's largest market, which was been hit by several recent bombings, including one in February that killed 137 people. They said the trips were proof that security was improving in the capital. Prominent visitors normally make the trip from the airport to the city center by helicopter.
The congressmen, who wore body armor during their hourlong shopping excursion, said they were impressed with the resilience and warmth of the Iraqi people, some of whom would not take money for their souvenirs. They were accompanied by the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus.
While the capital has seen a recent dip in violence as extra U.S. and Iraqi troops have flooded the streets, an Iraqi military spokesman said that militants fleeing the crackdown have made areas outside the capital "breeding grounds for violence," spreading deadly bombings and sectarian attacks to areas once relatively untouched.
The U.S. military said that the American four soldiers died Sunday and the first two had died Saturday, indicating that the attacks took places in the last minutes of Saturday and shortly after midnight on Sunday.
The names of the soldiers were not given and the military did not give an exact location of the attacks, saying only that they occurred southwest of the capital.
A Marine serving in Anbar province also died Sunday in a "non-combat related incident," the military said in a second statement.
According to the AP count 3,253 U.S. service members have died in Iraq since the war began in March 2003.
Brig. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi, the Iraqi military spokesman, promised that recent attacks would not derail the neighborhood sweeps that began in Baghdad on Feb. 14.
More than 600 Iraqis have been killed in sectarian violence since March 25, most in a series of high-profile suicide bombings. Among them were at least 152 people killed in a suicide truck bombing in Tal Afar — the deadliest single strike since the war began four years ago. Shiites, including police, went on a revenge shooting rampage afterward, killing at least 45 Sunni men.
In the latest Iraqi violence, a bomb hit a popular market in Tuz Khormato, 130 miles north of Baghdad on Sunday, killing three people and wounding four. It was the second attack in the city in as many days. Two Iraqis seeking work were killed in a car bombing on Saturday.
A suicide car bomber in a truck targeted an Iraqi army building in the northern city of Mosul, killing two civilians and wounding 22 people, including 15 soldiers, police spokesman Brig. Gen. Abdul-Karim al-Jibouri said.
Two top Sunni officials — lawmaker Omar Abdul-Sattar and Omar al-Jubouri, an aide to Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi — escaped an assassination attempt when a roadside bomb struck their convoy as it passed through one of Baghdad's most restive neighborhoods — the latest in a series of attacks by suspected Sunni insurgents against fellow Sunnis who have joined the political process.
A British soldier from the Duke of Lancaster's regiment died after being wounded by small-arms fire while on patrol in Iraq's second-largest city, Basra, becoming the 104th British to be killed in combat since the March 2003 invastion, the Ministry of Defense said.
Prime Minister Tony Blair has announced that Britain will withdraw about 1,600 troops from Iraq over the next few months and hopes to make other cuts to its 7,100-strong contingent by late summer.
Militants at an illegal checkpoint abducted 11 Shiite construction workers near Khalis, north of Baghdad in volatile Diyala province. Three women in the group were later freed. Shiite militias, Sunni insurgents and U.S. and Iraqi forces have been battling for weeks in the province.
Separately, U.S. military spokesman Rear Adm. Mark Fox said two suicide vests were found unexploded Saturday in the Green Zone, less than a week after a rocket attack killed two Americans in the vast central Baghdad district where the U.S. and British embassies and key offices of the Iraqi government are located.
With U.S. voters increasingly impatient with the conduct of the war and the American death toll rising, Democrats in the House and Senate have pushed through funding bills with timetables for withdrawing U.S. forces. The measures need to be reconciled before they are sent to President Bush, who has promised a veto.
Graham said setting a deadline would be a "huge mistake" and Bush would be right to use his veto because the security plan — to which Bush has pledged 30,000 extra American troops — was working.
The delegation included Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., and Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz.
Also Sunday, 20 bullet-riddled bodies were found, most in Baghdad, apparent victims of so-called sectarian death squads that are believed to be run by Shiite militias. The number was low compared to the average of 50 bodies per day that were turning up before the security crackdown.

Yet without old-fashioned, unescorted foot patrols the Baghdad Security Plan—the surge—is almost certainly doomed. It's not enough that body counts are down, at least for now. The plan depends on U.S. and Iraqi troops getting out on the streets to win civilians' trust and cooperation and make the city safe enough for real reconstruction, which in turn would create jobs and give ordinary Iraqis something worth defending against the insurgents and death squads. At present, though, most parts of the capital are still waiting for reinforcements, and some areas won't reach full strength until June. Adhamiya is getting maximum priority, with an entire Iraqi brigade and most of an American battalion already deployed, billets full. This was the part of town where Saddam Hussein last dared to go out in public before he went underground in April 2003, and it has been a hotbed of the Sunni insurgency ever since. The rest of the city won't be secure until places like Adhamiya are under control.
By Rod Nordland
Newsweek
APRIL 4, 2007:

The U.S. military said there was a mortar attack followed by another explosion, which could have been a car bomb, near the so-called Joint Security Station in Sadr City, but no U.S. casualties were reported. Joint Security Stations have been set up throughout the capital as part of security crackdown that entered its eighth week Wednesday.
The violence came as the U.S. military said it was disappointed in the high numbers of Iraqis being killed despite the security crackdown.
Maj. Gen. William Caldwell said sectarian violence dropped 26 percent from February to March. But he was largely referring to execution-style killings and assassinations usually blamed on Shiite death squads and acknowledged the military remained "extremely concerned" about high-profile bomb attacks that have killed more than 300 people in recent.
"There has been a drop in overall casualties within Baghdad," Caldwell said at a news conference in Baghdad, but he added: "When you look overall at the country at large, you have seen ... not a great reduction that we had wanted to see thus far."
The Iraqi government also acknowledged the rise in violence outside Baghdad and said it was extending the security plan to other areas in a bid to tackle it.
"These efforts are now expanded beyond the limits of Baghdad to provide peace and security backed by economic and political measures," government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said, singling out the area surrounding the northern city of Mosul and the volatile province of Diyala, northeast of Baghdad.
The statement came a day after the government, citing improved security, said it was shortening the Baghdad curfew by two hours and would allow citizens to be on the streets until 10 p.m.
But while the death toll is down in Baghdad, bloodshed has increased elsewher
Iraq after insurgents and militiamen moved operations out of the capital in advance of the security e in crackdown that began Feb. 14. Last week, more than 600 people were killed nationwide in sectarian attacks, mainly truck and suicide bombings thought to be the work of Sunni insurgents or al-Qaida in Iraq.
At least 17 people were killed or found dead in Iraq, including the six men killed in the ambush west of the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk.
The gunmen drove by in two cars and strafed the minibus about 6 a.m. in Manazlah as it was taking the employees to work at the Mullah Abdullah power station, local army commander Maj. Gen. Anwar Mohammed Amin said.
Two of the six killed were engineers and all from the surrounding area, Amin said, citing information from soldiers at the site. Police Brig. Gen. Sarhad Qadir confirmed the casualty toll.
The attack came two days after a suicide truck bomber struck a police station in a Kurdish neighborhood in Kirkuk, killing 15 people, including a newborn girl and a U.S. soldier, and wounding nearly 200.

April 3rd, 2007 3:01 am
Three U.S. soldiers killed in combat in Iraq

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Three U.S. soldiers were killed in combat in Iraq on Monday, the U.S. military said on Tuesday, bringing the U.S. death toll since the March 2003 invasion to 3,256.

One of the soldiers was killed and three were wounded when a large truck bomb exploded outside a police station in the northern city of Kirkuk. Two Iraqi policemen and 10 civilians were also killed.

1) GULF WAR 1, IRAQ'S OVER-RATED MILITARY IS DESTROYED BY BUSH'S FATHER
2) THEN, USA MILITARY NO-FLY ZONES OVER SOUTHERN AND NORTHERN IRAQ
3) UN "OIL FOR FOOD" AND OTHER SANCTIONS ON IRAQ
4) UN AND USA WEAPONS INSPECTORS IN IRAQ
5) USA INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES AND MILITARY FOCUS ON CENTRAL IRAQ
6) SADDAM FINANCIALLY SUPPORTED BY USA WITH MONEY AND WEAPONS UNTIL 1990
7) SADDAM "OUTSMARTED" ALL USA INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES? ABSURD
8) 18% MUSLIMS IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND LESS THAN THAT IN IRAQ
9) MOST MUSLIMS ARE SUNNIS AND MOST LIVE OUTSIDE THE MIDDLE-EAST
10) IRAQ AND IRAN ARE SHI'ITE NATIONS THAT HATE SUNNIS
11) SADDAM HUSSEIN HAD MANY CHRISTIANS IN HIS CABINET
12) SADDAM HATED SUNNI OSAMA AND KILLED ANYONE WITH A FOLLOWING
13) IRAQI SHI'ITES AND IRAQI SUNNIS FIGHTING FOR OVER 1,300 YEARS
14) THIS IS AN OIL WAR AND IRAN CONTROLS MANY OF THE OIL WATER LOGISTICS
15) ALL ATTORNEYS SHOULD HAVE SEEN THROUGH THESE LIES
16) TO "DEMOCRATIZE" IRAQ (THIS WILL NOT OCCUR) ENDS TERRORISM? NO.
17) CHRISTOPHER SCHEER AT WWW.ALTERNET.ORG

"The Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons."
-- George Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in a speech in Cincinnati.

LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." -- President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.

FACT: This story, leaked to and breathlessly reported by Judith Miller in the New York Times, has turned out to be complete baloney. Department of Energy officials, who monitor nuclear plants, say the tubes could not be used for enriching uranium. One intelligence analyst, who was part of the tubes investigation, angrily told The New Republic: "You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that's just a lie."

LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." -- President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.

FACT: This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA. Sold to Italian intelligence by some hustler, the document carried the signature of an official who had been out of office for 10 years and referenced a constitution that was no longer in effect. The ex-ambassador who the CIA sent to check out the story is pissed: "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," he told the New Republic, anonymously. "They [the White House] were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more strongly."

LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." -- Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."

FACT: There was and is absolutely zero basis for this statement. CIA reports up through 2002 showed no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." -- CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush.

FACT: Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In other words, by tweaking language, Tenet and Bush spun the intelligence180 degrees to say exactly the opposite of what it suggested.

LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq's control and patrolled by Allied war planes.

LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline. Furthermore, Iraq's drone-building program wasn't much more advanced than your average model plane enthusiast. And isn't a "manned aerial vehicle" just a scary way to say "plane"?

LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." -- President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

FACT: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.

LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." -- Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.

FACT: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, as previously reported on AlterNet the United States' own intelligence reports show that these stocks -- if they existed -- were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.

LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.

FACT: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.

LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." -- President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

FACT: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts -- including the State Department's intelligence wing in a report released this week -- have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.

CRITICAL POINTS ON IRAQ:

1) Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: "Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate.

THE IRAQI SHI'ITES AND IRAQI SUNNIS HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR OVER 1,300 YEARS DESPITE THEIR HISTORIC PERIOD OF TIMES LEADERS DYING AND THIS WILL CONTINUE. THIS ALSO APPLIES TO OSAMA BIN LADEN AS SUNNI AL-QAEDA WILL STILL EXIST IF AND WHEN HE IS CAPTURED/KILLED AND OVER 80% OF ALL MUSLIMS LIVE OUTSIDE THE MID-EAST AND LESS THAN 10% LIVE IN IRAQ, THUS, BUSH'S STATEMENT THAT "THE WAR ON TERROR" WILL BE RESOLVED BY THE OCCUPATION IN IRAQ IS ABSURD. THIS WILL BECOME WORSE BY 11/2008 AS THE SENTIMENTS THAT UNITES ALL ARABS ARE THAT "THE GREAT SATAN", THE U.S.A., IS OCCUPYING
A "HOLY" ARAB LAND, IRAQ, THAT WAS GIVEN TO THEM BY ALLAH (GOD), THAT IS SIMILAR TO U.S.A. INDIANS, THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT, LEBANON, AND THE "OFFICIAL" WAR BETWEEN MONARCHY SAUDI ARABIA (THAT THE U.S.A. IS ON FRIENDLY TERMS WITH AND THE OTHER ARABS IN THE WORLD SEE THE DOUBLE-STANDARD) AND ISRAEL. THESE REALITIES MUST BE RECOGNIZED AND POLICIES MUST BE MODIFIED ACCORDINGLY AS AL-QAEDA IS LIKELY PLEASED THAT THE U.S.A. MILITARY IS BOGGED DOWN IN IRAQ AND OVER-EXTENDED WHILE THEY OPERATE MORE FREELY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD TO PLAN FUTURE TERRORIST ACTS.

2) THE LEADERS OF AN EXTREMIST IDEOLOGICAL MOVEMENT MAY BE KILLED/IMPRISONED, YET THE SENTIMENT OF THOSE WHO SHARE SUCH SPECIFIC IDEOLOGY REMAIN AND USUALLY AND ALMOST ALWAYS, NEW LEADERS EMERGE WHETHER THEIR ORGANIZATIONS ARE LEGAL AND/OR ILLEGAL.

NATION STATES ARE EASIER TO TARGET THAN POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NON-NATION STATES AND IF THEY ARE LIKE AL-QAEDA, A WORLD-WIDE POLITICAL TERRORIST ORGANIZATION THAT WILL SURVIVE THE DEATHS OF THEIR LEADERS WHO WILL BECOME MARTYRS TO THEIR FOLLOWERS IF KILLED (LIKE SUNNI, IRAQI SADDAM HUSSEIN). WISDOM SAYS TO IMPRISON THEM FOR LIFE IF AND WHEN CAUGHT. ABSOLUTELY DO NOT PROJECT WESTERN CULTURE REALITIES UPON THEM.

Once one assumes an attitude of intolerance, there is no knowing where
it will take one. Intolerance, someone has said, is violence to the
intellect and hatred is violence to the heart.
--Mahatma Gandhi, 1942

A) MAFIA-U.S.A., ITALY, THE ENTIRE WORLD.
B) NAZISM-NEO-NAZIS/ANTI-SEMITISM IN THE USA, GERMANY, ETC...
C) RACISTS-K.K.K., U.S.A., THE ENTIRE WORLD.
D) HOMOPHOBIA-MATTHEW SHEPARD, U.S.A., THE ENTIRE WORLD.
E) SEXISM-CHRISTIANS, ISLAM, JUDAISM, ETC....
F) DRUG LORDS-MEXICO, SOUTH AMERICA, U.S.A. STREETS, THE ENTIRE WORLD.
G) COMMUNISM-N. KOREA, CUBA, CHINA, FORMER U.S.S.R. NATIONS SENTIMENTS.

AFTER 1,300 YEARS OF IRAQI SHI'ITES AND IRAQI SUNNIS FIGHTING, DOES
GATES DELUSIONAL COMMENT IMPLY THAT THE USA MILITARY MUST POLICE IRAQ FOR
STABILITY FOR ANOTHER 1,300 YEARS? PLUS, USA SOLDIERS AND IRAQI
SECURITY FORCES ARE STILL BEING MURDERED AND AL-SADR HAS NOT EVEN BEGUN YET AS AL-MALIKI GAVE HIM A TIP TO WAIT OUT THE "SURGE" SO THAT USA MILITARY LEAVES IRAQ AND THEN THEY WILL GO ON A GENOCIDE AGAINST THE IRAQI SUNNIS DUE TO SADDAM HUSSEIN'S ATORICITES AND WE MAY END UP WITH SOMETHING
WORSE THAN SADDAM HUSSEIN AS BUSH'S FATHER BELIEVED AND I DO TOO.

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DANGEROUS NATIONS AND WORLD LEADERS.

IS THIS GATES "SO FAR SO GOOD" AND HOW LONG WILL IT BE MAINTAINED?
1,300 YEARS.

U.S. Deaths Confirmed By The DoD: 3247
Reported U.S. Deaths Pending DoD Confirmation: 10
Total 3257
www.democrats.org

FEBRUARY-MARCH 2006, BEFORE THE "SURGE", HAD LESS U.S.A. CASUALTIES THAN FEBRUARY-MARCH 2007 WITH THE "SURGE".

Period US UK Other* Total Avg Days
4-2007 10 2 0 12 4 3

3-2007 81 1 0 82 2.65 31

2-2007 80 3 1 84 3 28

1-2007 83 3 0 86 2.77 31
12-2006 112 1 2 115 3.71 31
11-2006 70 6 2 78 2.6 30
10-2006 106 2 2 110 3.55 31
9-2006 72 3 2 77 2.57 30
8-2006 65 1 0 66 2.13 31
7-2006 43 1 2 46 1.48 31
6-2006 61 0 2 63 2.1 30
5-2006 69 9 1 79 2.55 31
4-2006 76 1 5 82 2.73 30

3-2006 31 0 2 33 1.06 31

Support Our Troops and Their Families

From Newsweek.com

Narrated by Glenn Kutler, iCasualties.org
Dec. 11, 2006: Three years and nine months after the U.S.-led Coalition began its war against Saddam Hussein, researchers have quietly recorded another grim milestone in the cost of the conflict. American military casualties have now exceeded 25,000.

IRAQ IS REVENGE VIOLENCE AFTER REVENGE VIOLENCE AND AL-QAEDA IS A WORLD
(NOT A NATION STATE) MOVEMENT THAT ALSO HAS OPERATIVES IN THE USA AND
CANADA. THUS, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO ISOLATE THEM. EVEN VIETNAM WAS
EASIER WITH THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH.

NOTE: WITHDRAW FROM IRAQ AND RE-DEPLOY TO AVOID FUTURE CATASTROPHIES IN
IRAQ, AL-QAEDA (MOST MUSLIMS LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE MIDDLE-EAST), ETC....
THE USA TROOPS ARE ACKNOWLEDGED TO BE OVER-EXTENDED AND THE USA WILL
NEED THEM AND THE MONEY FOR THE QUAGMIRE IN IRAQ FOR FUTURE ISSUES THAT
WILL AFFECT THE USA FAR MORE.

HERE IS COMMON SENSE:

Zbigniew Brzezinski, former national security adviser to President
Jimmy Carter, said the Bush administration's logic was flawed that fighting al Qaeda in Iraq would prevent it from attacking the United States.

"What the administration fails to understand, and it's a fundamental
historic error, is that we cannot be acting like an imperial power in the
post-imperial age, like a colonial power in a post-colonial age," he
said on CNN.

"The only way to eradicate terrorism is to have the support and
consensus of all the moderates in the countries that potentially breed
terrorists. And not trying to do it by ourselves with means which increasingly alienate people," he said.

3) BUSH COMMENTS ON THE SUCCESS OF THE "SURGE" WILL BACKFIRE ON HIM AS
VIOLENCE IN IRAQ WILL ERUPT AGAIN AND AGAIN AS THERE ARE 2 MORE MAJOR
FALL ISLAMIC HOLIDAYS IN OCTOBER BESIDES OTHERS, AND THE IRAQI SHI'ITES
AND KURDS STILL WANT REVENGE AGAINST THE IRAQI SUNNIS DUE TO SUNNI
SADDAM HUSSEINS ATROCITIES. THE SUNNIS WILL FIGHT FOR SELF-PRESERVATION.

4) JOHN HOWARD OF AUSTRALIA'S SUPPORT OF BUSH/IRAQ HAS HIM FAR BEHIND
IN THE POLLS FOR THE FALL AUSTRALIAN ELECTION AND HE WILL LOSE AND THE
U.K. TONY BLAIR IS OUT OF OFFICE IN THE FALL 2007 TOO. ALSO, AUSTRALIA
IS UPSET OVER THEIR CITIZEN IN GUANTANAMO BAY WHO AFTER YEARS IS JUST
FINISHED GOING TO GO THROUGH THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

5) THESE ARE BUSH'S LAST ATTEMPTS TO SALVAGE IRAQ AND WILL ULTIMATELY
FAIL.

6) BUSH IN IRAQ FOR OIL BUSINESS (AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES) AND HIS LEGACY:

7) BUSH IRAQ BUSINESS:

A) HALLIBURTON (CHENEY)
B) BECHTEL (BUSH AND BIN LADENS)
C) BRITISH PETROLEUM (THIS IS WHY TONY BLAIR IS WITH BUSH)
D) EXXON (BUSH AND CHENEY)

8) FALL 2007, BLAIR OF BRITIAN AND HOWARD OF AUSTRALIA, BUSH'S 2 MAIN
WESTERN SUPPORTERS, ARE GONE BY FALL 2007 DUE TO THEIR NATIONS' PUBLIC
SENTIMENT. BUSH WILL BE EXTREMELY ISOLATED THEN AND THERE WILL BE ONE
MORE YEAR BEFORE THE 11/2008 USA ELECTIONS.

RECOGNIZE THESE FACTS AND THAT BUSH WILL NOT BACK DOWN AS HE HATES
BEING CHALLENGED, YET DEMOCRATS MUST CHALLENGE HIM AS HE HAS MADE THE USA
AND THE WORLD MORE DANGEROUS DUE TO HIS OBSESSION WITH IRAQ.

RECOGINZE THAT U.S.A. VOTERS WILL TAKE IT OUT ON REPUBLICANS DUE TO NOT BEING ABLE TO VOTE AGAINST AN ARROGANT PRESIDENT WHO IGNORE THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. ONLY REPUBLICANS IN SAFE REPUBLICAN STRONGHOLDS FACING RE-ELECTION HAVE A SAFETY NET, THE OTHERS WILL MOST LIKELY LOSE TO DEMOCRATS.

Olmert seeks regional peace conference By KARIN LAUB, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 51 minutes ago

JERUSALEM - In a dramatic response to an Arab peace initiative, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday invited Arab leaders to a regional peace conference to discuss their ideas for resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Olmert's surprise call came amid a flurry of new international peace efforts. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has repeatedly traveled to Israel to try to spur negotiations, and visiting German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is currently president of the EU, was here Sunday to buttress those efforts.

Speaking at a joint news conference with Merkel, Olmert said, "I would take advantage of this important opportunity of being here in Jerusalem with the president of the European Union to invite to a meeting all Arab heads of state, including, of course, the king of Saudi Arabia, whom I regard as an important leader, in order to engage in dialogue." He said each side would bring its own demands, and neither would try to dictate terms.

Here is a quote from Justice Arthur Goldberg:

It is fundamental that the great powers of Congress to conduct war and
to regulate the Nation's foreign relations are subject to the
constitutional requirements of due process. The imperative necessity for
safeguarding these rights to procedural due process under the gravest of
emergencies has existed throughout our Constitutional history, for it is
then, under the pressing exigencies of crisis, that there is the
greatest temptation to dispense with fundamental Constitutional guarantees
which, it is feared, will inhibit governmental action."

2007 BUDGET=FUNDS FOR USA MILITARY IN IRAQ:

COMMON SENSE: FIGHT BUSH ON IRAQ AND DO NOT INTERNALLY BE FRUSTRATED. THIS IS A NO-LOSE BET 11/2008 VERSUS REPUBLICANS THAT SUPPORT HIM ON RECORD:

LOTTERY 2008: BUSH, CHENEY, AND POSSEE USING NAZI "FEAR" TACTICS:

HERMAN GOERING: HITLER'S #2 MAN

Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and
exposing the country to greater danger."

The problems that we the peoples on the earth face today are not desultory as every decision made by the Pulpit of Power has direct and indirect effects upon our own specific Nation and all Nations. Notwithstanding that issue and the present dangers we the peoples of the earth face on a daily basis, our leadership is more than adequate to meet these challenges and threats simultaneously protecting our freedoms if they love people more than the love of money. Leadership insists that overreactions and intrusions upon Constitutional Rights, Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, and Human Rights are not trampled upon or taken away despite any potential threats.

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it….
Through violence you may murder the hater,
but you do not murder hate.
In fact, violence merely increases hate….Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."

Mahatma Gandhi:

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?"

Here is a quote from Justice Arthur Goldberg that emphasizes that point:

"It is fundamental that the great powers of Congress to conduct war and to regulate the Nation’s foreign relations are subject to the constitutional requirements of due process. The imperative necessity for safeguarding these rights to procedural due process under the gravest of emergencies has existed throughout our Constitutional history, for it is then, under the pressing exigencies of crisis, that there is the greatest temptation to dispense with fundamental Constitutional guarantees which, it is feared, will inhibit governmental action."

Here is another quote from former U.S.A. President Woodrow Wilson on leadership:

"Once lead these people into war and they’ll forget there ever was such a thing as tolerance. To fight you must be brutal and ruthless and the spirit of ruthlessness will enter the very fiber of our national life, infecting Congress, the courts, the policeman on the beat, the man in the street."

Here are some quotes from World leaders that are applicable to this discussion:

Winston Churchill:

"Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The Statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events."

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."

Noam Chomsky:

"It is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and expose lies."

WORDS OF WISDOM:

BUSH MAKES A VETO OF 2007 BUDGET THAT FUNDS THE USA TROOPS

A) THE VETO DENIES THE MONEY FOR THE USA MILITARY
B) THE VETO DENIES THE MONEY FOR MILITARY HOSPITALS
C) THE VETO DENIES MONEY FOR HURRICANE STATES
D) THE VETO DENIES MONEY FOR NEEDY STATES
E) THE VETO IS ANTI-DEMOCRATIC, AGAINST THE MAJORITY
F) ALL REPUBLICANS VOTING AGAINST THE BUDGET ON RECORD
G) DEMOCRATS CENTRAL LEFT AND USA PUBLIC SENTIMENT.

1) BUSH'S PLAN IN IRAQ AND "THE MCCAIN PRINCIPLE" SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE RIGHT AFTER THE CAPTURE OF SADDAM HUSSEIN AND BEFORE ABU GHRAIB WHEN THE USA WAS CONSIDERED THE "HERO" AND BEFORE ANY NEGATIVE EVENTS HAPPENED AFFECTING IRAQI PUBLIC SENTIMENT, INCLUDING HADITHA, ETC....
OVERWHELMING FORCE TO SECURE IRAQ WHILE REBUILDING THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE AND SOCIETY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE DURING THIS PERIOD OF PEACE AND AS REPUBLICAN JAMES BAKER, JR, OF THE IRAQ STUDY GROUP STATED, BUSH'S PLAN NOW IS
"NO LONGER VIABLE" AND THAT IS FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED REASONS.

2) SADDAM HUSSEIN IS DEAD AND NO WMD IN IRAQ, THE RATIONALÉ FOR THE WAR AND OCCUPATION OF IRAQ. WITH BUSH STILL OBSESSED WITH IRAQ DUE TO HIS LEGACY AND THE "DISASTER" OF THE IRAQI OIL DEALS FOR EXXON, BRITISH PETROLEUM, HALLIBURTON, BECHTEL, AND WAR PROFITEERRS FOR WITHDRAWING FROM IRAQ (AS THE OIL DEALS CONSTRUCTED BY BUSH AND THE BUSH IMPLEMENTED IRAQI GOVERNMENT WILL CHANGE AFTER USA MILITARY WITHDRAWL AND THE OIL DEALS WILL BE ANNULED BY THE LEGITIMATE IRAQ GOVERNMENT IN THE FUTURE) AT THE EXPENSE OF USA MILITARY INJURED TROOPS IN IRAQ AT VETERAN HOSPITALS LIKE WALTER REED AND THE BUREAUCRATIC HURDLES FOR THE INJURED USA TROOPS RECEIVING THE MONETARY AND MEDICAL HELP THAT THEY DESERVE.

3) AS A FORMER JEHOVAH'S WITNESS (J.W.), AND COMING OUT OF A RELIGIOUS SECT, HEAR WORDS OF WISDOM:
J.W.'S REFUSE BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS DUE TO BELIEVING THAT IT IS A SIN AGAINST GOD AND THAT IF THEY ACCEPT ONE, THAT GOD WILL CONDEMN THEM TO ETERNAL DESTRUCTION. J.W. BELIEF IS THAT ALL GOVERNMENTS AND RELIGIONS ARE UNDER THE CONTROL OF SATAN THE DEVIL AND ANY BENEVOLENT GOAL OF FORCING THEM TO ACCEPT BLOOD TRANFUSIONS TO SAVE THEIR LIVES ARE SEEN IN J.W. REALITY AS SATAN THE DEVIL USING HUMANS TO PRESSURE THEM INTO SINNING AGAINST GOD AND THIS SENTIMENT OF THE GOVERNMENTS AND RELIGIONS, EXCEPT THEIRS, BEING UNDER THE CONTROL OF SATAN THE DEVIL BECOMES MORE INGRAINED INTO THEIR IDEOLOGICAL RELIGIOUS BELIEF. ALTHOUGH BEING ABSURD, IT IS THEIR REALITY AND IF THIS HAPPENS WITH A WESTERN, CHRISTIAN RELIGION, THAN EXPONENTIALLY INCREASE THAT 1,000 TIMES WITH THE ISLAMIC RELIGION AND DENOMINATIONS. (J.W.'S BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST CONTRARY TO FALSE STATEMENTS: J.W.'S BELIEVE THAT JESUS CHRIST IS THE 1ST CREATION OF GOD AND THE SON OF GOD. J.W.'S BELIEVE THAT YHWH, JEHOVAH IN ENGLISH, IS GOD JUST LIKE THE ISRALEI RELIGION).

4) SUNNI AL-QAEDA IS NOT WELCOMED BY SHI'ITE IRAN AND CERTAINLY WILL NOT BE BY A SHI'ITE IRAQ, THE 2 MAIN NATIONS WITH SHI'ITE DOMINATED POPULATIONS. AL-QAEDA IS LIKELY EXAGGERATING THEIR ACTIVITIES IN IRAQ THAT PROBABLY IS MINIMAL WHEN THERE ARE PERIODS OF "PEACE" TO ATTACK ANY ISLAMIC DENOMINATION TO INCITE THEM INTO MORE VIOLENCE.

5) AL-QAEDA IS OPERATING MORE FREELY IN THE WHOLE WORLD AS THEY ARE A NON-NATION STATE, TERRORIST POLITICAL ORGANIZATION AND IRAQ IS DIVERTING ATTENTION, MILITARY RESOURCES AND MILITARY MANPOWER FROM THEIR FUTURE PLANS.

6) BUSH HAS EXPOSED USA MILITARY GROUND FORCES LIMITATIONS DUE TO A PROLONGED GUERILLA WARFARE STRATEGY THAT INCLUDES SUICIDE BOMBERS WITH ONLY ONE NATION, NOT EVEN WORLD-WIDE POLITICAL TERRORIST AL-QAEDA, BY IRRESPONSIBLY OVER-EXTENDING OUR MILITARY MIGHT EXCEPT FOR WARSHIPS AND WARPLANES.

7) TRUE "DISASTER"=REMAINING IN IRAQ (WHEN THE IRAQIS DO NOT WISH TO LIVE IN PEACE AND SECURITY AND AFTER 1,300 YEARS OF IN-FIGHTING, THE SOLUTION HAS TO BE POLITICAL AND SINCE AFTER 4 YEARS THEY ARE STILL REFUSING BENCHMARKS OF PROGRESS, THEN RE-DEPLOY TO CONTAIN THEIR CIVIL WAR AROUND THE BORDERS AND FOCUS ON AL-QAEDA AND AFGHANISTAN/PAKISTAN. THIS ALLOWS SUNNI DOMINATED AL-QAEDA TO OPERATE IN A SHI'ITE NATION, IRAQ, JUST ENOUGH TO INCITE VARIOUS IRAQI GROUPS WHILE NOT ENOUGH EFFORT IS PUT INTO THEIR OPERATIONS IN THE REST OF THE WORLD, SUCH AS INDONESIA AND EVEN IN THE USA WHERE AGAIN, OSAMA BIN LADEN RECEIVED HIS COLLEGE DEGREE LIKE MANY MEMBERS OF AL-QAEDA.

8) THIS IS A NO-LOSE EFFORT AS THE USA PUBLIC SENTIMENT AGAINST IRAQ WILL INCREASE UNTIL AND AFTER 11/2008 AND BUSH MUST BE FOUGHT ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT AND THEN LET THE VOTERS DECIDE IN 11/2008 AS EVEN MANY MEMBERS OF THE MILITARY BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD BE A TIME DEADLINE FOR USA MILITARY PRESENCE IN IRAQ AND AFTER 1,300 YEARS, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE IRAQI SHI'ITES AND IRAQI SUNNIS AND IRAQI KURDS WILL MAKE PEACE BEFORE 11/2008, ESPECIALLY WITH AL-QAEDA AND NEIGHBOR NATIONS INFLUENCES.

9) ALL ARABS SHARE IN COMMON A HATRED FOR THE USA/UK/ISRAEL ALLIANCE AND AL-QAEDA IS MANIPULATING THAT SENTIMENT AND ANY MILITARY ATTACK ON IRAN WILL INCITE 1.5 BILLION MUSLIMS AS THIS WILL ADD TO THE PALESTINIAN CONFLICT AND LEBANON.

10) THE UK SOLDIERS MUST BE FREED DIPLOMATICALLY. THEY WERE SPYING ON IRAN AND SHOULD CONTINUE, YET MILITARY THREATS AND/OR ACTION IS ABSURD AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME. LEARN THIS LESSON ON FUTURE ESPIONAGE AND NOT TO UNDERSTIMATE IRANIAN MILITARY CAPABILITIES.

11) WISDOM SAYS NOT TO ATTACK IRAN (UNLESS THEY DO NOT FREE THE U.K. SOLDIERS) OR SYRIA UNTIL AFTER IRAQ, IF NECESSARY. EITHER ATTACK AND/OR BOTH, ESPECIALLY INCLUDING ISRAEL, WILL GUARANTEE AN ESCALATION OF VIOLENCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT WILL SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

12) ANY ATTACK ON IRAN WOULD ONLY BE NEUTRALIZED IF THEY DO NOT FREE THE U.K. SOLDIERS. IF THEY FREE THE SOLDIERS, IT WOULD BE WISE TO TEMPORARILY REFRAIN FROM ANY ATTACK DUE TO THE SAFETY OF THE USA SOLDIERS IN IRAQ AS THIS WILL DEFINITELY INFLAME THE ARAB WORLD AND PROVIDE PROPAGANDA GALORE FOR AL-QAEDA.

13) THE PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL IS RIGHT ON COURSE AND ANY ATTACKS ON IRAN AND SYRIA WOULD IMMEDIATELY DESTROY THE MISSION IN IRAQ AND THIS OVERTURE OF PRIME MINISTER OLMERT, ESPECIALLY TO SUNNI SAUDI ARABIA:

14) IF WORLD SOCIO-ECONOMIC INEQUALITIES ARE NOT CHANGED, THEN THIS IS THE PATH TO REDUCING TERRORISM AND CRIME:

BUSH NOT BUDGE: THIS IS TO DEMS BENEFITS FOR 11/2008: THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR:

1) THE MAJORITY OF AMERICAN PUBLIC SENTIMENT AGAINST THE IRAQI OCCUPATION WHERE THE USA TROOPS ARE NOW A POLICE FORCE BETWEEN THE SECTARIAN CONFLICTS, IN-FIGHTING, AND AL-QAEDA (WHO BEING SUNNI DOMINATED, WILL DEPART A SHI'ITE IRAQ AND HIDE IN SUNNI NEIGHBORHOODS
(SIMILAR TO SHI'ITE IRAN)
AND THE VIOLENCE WILL NOT END WHILE USA TROOPS ARE IN WHAT ALL ARABS, DESPITE THEIR DENOMINATIONS, CONSIDER "HOLY" LAND BY ALLAH (GOD).

THIS ANTI-IRAQ SENTIMENT WILL GROW EVEN MORE IN THE USA BY 11/2008 AS THE USA TROOPS WILL STILL BE THERE.

2) BUSH MUST BE CONFRONTED AND FOUGHT AS HIS OBSESSION WITH IRAQ IS INSANE AS THE IRAQI SHI'ITES AND IRAQI SUNNIS HAVE FOUGHT FOR 1,300 YEARS
(SEE BELOW),
THE WORLD DID NOT FACE DISASTER FROM THE TERRORISTS AS REPUBLICAN REAGAN STATED ABOUT LEBANON,
AL-QAEDA IS A WORLD-WIDE TERRORIST POLITICAL ORGANIZATION, NOT JUST IN IRAQ AND THEY ARE FREELY OPERATING IN THE REST OF THE WORLD WHILE TOO MUCH FOCUS IS ON IRAQ AND AL-QAEDA IS EXPLOITING THAT AND THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S FOOLISH AGENDA THERE AS IRAQI VIOLENCE WILL INCREASE AFTER USA WITHDRAWL BEFORE STABILILIZING, LIKE LEBANON, SO RE-DEPLOY TO CONTAIN THIS.

3) THE MINIMAL DECREASE, AGAIN, MINIMAL DECREASE IN VIOLENCE IN IRAQ WILL NOT LAST AS THE USA MILITARY "SURGE" OF POLICING IRAQI IN-FIGHTING, EVEN AMONG THEIR OWN DENOMINATIONS, WILL ERUPT FAR MORE, ESPECIALLY SINCE AS SEEN THE OTHER DAY, THE IRAQI SHI'ITES ARE LOSING DISCIPLINE WHEN THE SHI'ITE DOMINATED IRAQI POLICE GO ON A KILLING SPREE AGAINST SUSPECTED IRAQI SUNNI TERRORISTS. THIS IS NOT "DEMOCRACY" AS BUSH HAS STATED.

4) CONGRESS PASSED FUNDING FOR THE IRAQI WAR WITH A PLAN
(THAT REPUBLICANS FALSELY STATED THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE)
FOR SUCCESS AND WITHDRAWL TO RE-DEPLOY FOR AL-QAEDA SINCE THE IRAQIS DO NOT WISH TO LIVE IN PEACE AND SECURITY THAT WILL ONLY BE SOLVED BY POLITICAL SOLUTIONS, NOT AN ESCALATION OF MILITARY MIGHT BY THE USA THAT IS OVER-EXTENDED AND AS THE NEXT 1.5 YEARS GO BY, WE WILL SEE THIS WORSEN. IF IRAN IS DRAWN INTO THIS CONFLICT, THEN WE WILL UNITE THE ARABS AS THEY ALL BELIEVE, CONTARY TO USA AND UK MILITARY LEADERS THAT CONSTANTLY MISLEAD PEOPLE AND OBVIOUSLY HAVE NOT LEARNED THEIR LESSONS FROM HISTORY, THAT DESPITE THEIR DENOMINATIONS, WILL SEE THE USA/UK/ISRAEL ALLIANCE AS A WAR AGAINST ISLAM BECAUSE THIS ADDS TO THE PALESTINIAN AND LEBANON CONFLICTS. THE UK SOLDIERS MUST BE FREED, YET THEY WERE SPYING ON IRAN AS THEY SHOULD BE, YET DO THIS DIPLOMATICALLY WITHOUT MILITARY THREATS. ONE WAR AT A TIME.

5) BUSH IS PLAYING POLITICS
BY LYING THAT DEMOCRATS DID NOT BUDGET FUNDS FOR THE IRAQ WAR.
THE CONTINGENCIES OF IRAQIS TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN NATION IS WISE, NOT POLITICS, AND IT IS BUSH MAKING A VETO OVER THE MAJORITY OF BOTH CHAMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO IS "WASTING" TAXPAYER MONEY AND TIME DUE TO THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS SUPPORTING A TIME-LINE FOR WITHDRAWL, EVEN AMONG MEMBERS OF THE MILITARY.

6) WALTER REED MEDICAL CENTER FOR WOUNDED IRAQI SOLDIERS IS NOT SUPPORTING THE TROOPS AFTER THEY BECOME TOO INJURED TO FIGHT.
TO PUT UP GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATIC ROADBLOCKS AND HURDLES FOR THE USA INJURED TROOPS TO RECEIVE BENEFITS IS NOT SUPPORTING THE TROOPS.

7) BUSH OUTRAGEOUSLY STATING DEMOCRAT "PORK SPENDING" IS ACTUALLY TO ASSIST THE ONES IN NEED, ESPECIALLY THE USA INJURED TROOPS AND AVERAGE AMERICANS IN NEED DUE TO DISASTERS, ECONOMIC AND NATURAL, AND THIS MUST BE PUBLICIZED OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

8) BUSH VETO IS AGAINST USA MILITARY FUNDING IN IRAQ WITH CONTINGENCIES ON IRAQIS TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN NATION, USA MILITARY TROOPS WHO ARE INJURED, THE GULF COAST HURRICANE, THE FARMERS IN THE MID-WEST, ETC....

9) ALL CONGRESSES AND PRESIDENTS HAVE THEIR OWN SPECIFIC INTERESTS, SO BUSH IS USING HITLER FEAR TACTICS ABOUT LEAVING IRAQ SO FORCE HIM TO COMPROMISE AND TAKE HIM ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT, IF NECESSARY, TO REGAIN BALANCE OF POWERS (EXECUTIVE, CONGRESSIONAL, AND JUDICIAL) THAT HE SO RECENTLY ALLUDED TO AND THIS IS NOT A GAMBLE AS THE RECENT EVENTS IN IRAQ HAVE SHOWN AND AFTER 1,300 YEARS OF IRAQI IN-FIGHTING, THE "SURGE" AT BEST IS THE USA MILITARY BEING THE POLICE FORCE IN IRAQ AND CANNOT, I REPEAT, CANNOT BE MAINTAINED FOR AN INDEFINITE TIME PERIOD. THE TERRORISTS AND INSURGENTS ALREADY KNOW THIS, SO OPPOSING STATEMENTS ARE OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY.

10) TO WITHDRAWL FROM AN IRAQI CIVIL WAR (THE SHI'ITES WILL EVENTUALLY TAKE OVER AND ANNUL THE BUSH OIL DEALS) THAT ALLOWS AL-QAEDA MORE WORLD-WIDE FREEDOM IS THE DISASTER ALONG WITH THE BUSH OIL DEALS IN POST SADDAM HUSSEIN IRAQ FOR BRITISH PETROLEUM, EXXON, HALLIBURTON, AND BECHTEL.

11) GO WITH THE MAJORITY OF AMERICAN PUBLIC SENTIMENT DESPITE WHATEVER BUSH STATES. COMPARE IRAQ WITH LEBANON: TERRORISTS, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS, AND THAT ON 9/11, BUSH WAS PRESIDENT, NOT A DEMOCRAT.

12) BUSH HATES BEING CHALLENGED AND "BUSHIES" DIVERT FROM THE REAL
ISSUES.

13) RE-IMPLEMENTING USA CONSTITUTIONAL "CHECKS AND BALANCES" IS NOT
"WASTING" USA TAXPAYER TIME AND MONEY.

DEMOCRACY: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/democracy

de•moc•ra•cy(d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de•moc•ra•cies
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through
elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political
power.
4. Majority rule.
5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual
within a community.

Bush criticizes Democrats after vote on Iraq
President says focus on U.S. attorney firings distract from other
issues
NBC VIDEO

House OKs war deadline; Bush vows veto
March 23: A bill approved by the House provides about $100 billion for
the war, but also requires all combat troops to leave Iraq by September
2008. It's a move that upset President Bush. NBC's Chip Reid reports.
Nightly News

Updated: 11:18 p.m. ET March 24, 2007
WASHINGTON - President Bush accused the Democratic-led Congress of
wasting taxpayers’ time picking fights with the White House instead of
resolving disputes over money for U.S. troops and the firings of the U.S.
attorneys.

In his weekly radio address Saturday, Bush called on Democratic leaders
in Congress to move beyond political discord and take bipartisan action
on both issues that have driven a wedge between the Bush administration
and Capitol Hill.

THE ISSUE IS THE HONESTY OF LEADERS AND LYING TO CONGRESS: GONZALEZ

MANALAPAN, Fla. Mar 25, 2007 (AP)— Vice President Dick Cheney on
Saturday accused the Democrat-led House of not supporting troops in Iraq
and of sending a message to terrorists that America will retreat in the
face danger.

"They're not supporting the troops. They're undermining them," Cheney
told a gathering of the Republican Jewish Coalition at the oceanside
Ritz-Carlton hotel in Manalapan, Fla., about 60 miles north of Miami.

On Friday, the House voted to clamp a cutoff deadline on the Iraq war,
agreeing by a thin margin to pull combat troops out by next year.

ANSWER:
WALTER REED MEDICAL CENTER AND HALLIBURTON:

Many members of Congress have commented on the reports of neglect at
the post, but it was Congresswoman Slaughter'sand Congressman Murtha's
words that seemed to most closely echo my own sentiments.

Louise Slaughter:

"Supporting our troops begins with giving them a mission that makes
sense and that doesn't needlessly jeopardize their lives," the
Congresswoman continued. "It ends with an unconditional commitment to men and
women who have made sacrifices few of us can fully appreciate. If this
Administration is going to order soldiers into battle, then it has no right
to stand on the sidelines when they come home. We need a serious
evaluation of the care being given to our veterans, and must immediately
address holes and gaps in a system that can't afford either."
"Critics of the President's escalation of the war are told that they
can't both support the troops and oppose their mission," Rep. Slaughter
added. "I think that you can't support the troops if you send them into
battle without proper armor, or deny them critical medical care and
counseling after they are injured. That is the definition of hypocrisy,
and our wounded soldiers are paying the p

Just had an IM conversation with my sister online. Her husband has been with General Motors since he graduated from high school over 30 years ago. Our conversation went like this:

Charmie91752 (12:37:55 PM): hey, look at the 2008 Democratic National Convention site. It's really beautiful. The convention is going to be in Denver, so it has a western feel to it. http://www.demconvention.com/index.html

FraudinSDcourts (12:39:55 PM): GM employees are angry today with Bush because he just made an agreement with south korea that they could bring in cars and sell them here but they can take their boats back empty in other words they don't have to take any of our cars to sell so that is not fair trade agreement.

Charmie91752 (12:40:06 PM): omg

Charmie91752 (12:40:14 PM): after he visited their plant too!!

FraudinSDcourts (12:40:20 PM): yea

Charmie91752 (12:40:26 PM): wtf?

Charmie91752 (12:40:46 PM): 10 more kids died in Iraq last night

FraudinSDcourts (12:41:13 PM): so far away from their parents, no goodbyes

Charmie91752 (12:41:21 PM): yeah

Charmie91752 (12:41:27 PM): awful

Charmie91752 (12:41:44 PM): i wonder how many of those kids came from republican parents?

Are there any figures on that question? How many of the kids sent to Iraq came from republican families?

I have a distant relative who went to Iraq.He will not be listed as one of the dead.Thanks to the instant help in the field he is now living at his home vitually brain dead and fed through a tube.In many ways he would have been far better off dead as he is just a physical shell of a human being.At least the family could grieve if he was gone.Beyond sad.

Definition of Organized Crime - American Dictionary - Widespread criminal activities,that occur within a centrally controlled formal structure.

Compare to the Bush Administration. Dead Eye Dick and The Decider need to be impeached. From the lies told to invade Iraq, the secret torture prisons, outing A CIA agent, misuse of the Justice Dept, Abramoff, etc....... This administration is wrought with criminals. The Dems need to not only stop funding the Iraq war and bring our troops home, they need to start immediate impeachment hearings. Save America from this "mob" of Republican criminals.

The next Iraq war funding bill review date is not a U.S. exit date. So why do Republicans and the White House think these dates are the same?

The Iraq war-funding bill asks for improvement in Iraq in order for the approved funding now to be again later reviewed at a certain date. So why won’t the White House go along with a funding bill that asks for improvement in Iraq if that’s all the White House wants is improvement in Iraq to win the war as well?

If the dates of funding the war and winning the war itself are both based on Iraq’s own success, an exit date now or in the future does not give terrorists a way win in the war against terrorism by spinning Iraq’s success. Unless everyone buys the terrorists spin that they might be pushing America out by creating more violence right before the date America plans to leave.

However, if America is not successful at helping Iraq be successful, by all means, America needs to leave and might as well leave.

I think it is simply amazing that, with all the text expended
above, no one has yet answered my challenge of articulating a sensible plan of how we are to secure forty
percent of the world's oil that comes from the Persian Gulf,
once after we leave Iran dominates both sides of it.

No matter how much vitriol is expended on George Bush,
and his extraordinary mismanagement of the war, all of us
are still left with an Iran that is a continual sponsor of terrorism.

It thumbs its nose at unanimous resolutions of the United Nations, while blatantly developing a nuclear weapon,
and all the threats that obviously come from with it.

And no one can write their plan for dealing with all this?

As much as I don't like the way the war has developed, I
will always go with the person, General Petraeus, who does
have a plan and wrote the book on counterterrorism to
provide all the background explaining how his plan works.

Quite frankly, those unable to articulate a comparable plan,
would do well to give his plan a chance to work. No level of
ranting and raving ever provided security for a nation. Not
to have a plan for our security in such obviously dangerous
times is in itself a clear demonstration of moral impotence.

First the government (neo cons who have taken control) must admit why we are in Iraq: 1) to control the oil 2) to enforce the hegemony of the US$ 3) to maintain prolonged military operations to profit the Military Industrial Complex 4) to Westernize the middle east to open markets for junk products. Then we must elect a government that will put an end to this and the US must accept a roll in the world that is in harmony with negotiated problem solving and peace.

salute: The Bushies will never admit the real reasons why we are in Iraq. It's going to have to be dragged out of them, investigation by investigation.
Given the ongoing corruption and continued pandering of the war-profiteers, the truth is not going to be pretty.
There needs to be thorough determined investigations of all the trails that have been found. Abramoff, the K-street project, the no-bid contracts, the disappearance of the confiscated Iraqi money, the suppression of intelligence reports that showed Hussein had no ties to Bin Laden, the Valerie Plame affair, the firings of competent professionals throughout the administration, particularly of whistle blowers, of which the US attorneys are only the latest in a long string.
We need to push for continued investigations, and prosecutions of the wrong-doers.
INVESTIGATE! IMPEACH!! INDICT!!!

Hey, why is everyone working so hard to counter the President's actions? Just let them (RNC) and the President continue with everything they are doing!! The American people are well aware of all the horrible things that this (republican) administration has done and continues to do! Mr. Bush will have everyone in this country so agravated that the Republicans will lose every important election that is not rigged in their (republicans) favor. If there is a way to modernize the voting procedures in this country, so that everyone that wants to vote has their vote count, I predict a landslide for the Democrats!!! I have talked to a lot of people on both sides of the political aisle and everyone agrees that Mr.Bush and his cast of characters, that he keeps appointing to cover up or hide mistakes made by Him or his previous appointees is a disgrace to America. The people of this country are not fooled by any of this!! All we need to do is just expose the Republican politicians and appointees and the Democratic Party will do great in 2008! Leave the President alone, Mr. Bush (President) is doing us Democrats a big favor politically!

I work for the US Army in Germany. The 1st Armored Division got back from Iraq in March. In Iraq they had 93 killed and hundreds more maimed. It was their second time deployed since they were there for the start of the war also. They lost I believe something like 3 times as many on this last deployment then they did in the evasion and occupation. Those statistics suggest that there has been no progress. My point, as a registered republican I hope the democrat’s in congress will stand there ground. Do not provide funds for the troops without Bush giving a timeline. If Bush veto’s the bill it is him not funding the troops. If he doesn't have funds he will be forced to withdraw them. The troops win either way. The world as a whole was much safer before the war started. Sadam killed several thousands throughout his rule, but in the 5 years of war 20 times as many have died. More have been displaced. The US is now considered a rogue nation in the majority of the world. Let get back to being a nation who helps!

sorbonne on April 10, 2007 Response to your statement.

Gas cost more today then before the war. We were buying limited amounts of oil from Iraq before the war. Saddam was it check to use a chess term.

Iran is a small country. It has a right to defend itself. The reason we have atomic weapons is to deterr aggression. Lets say they are trying to build a bomb, what bussiness is it of ours. If we were to distroy ours then perhaps they would not feel the need to have any either. We are in the process of building new A bombs now.

As to a plan get out, nothing to add.