Tag: Iraq War

The war will end, some day. We tend to forget that. Neither our military nor our economy can sustain this abomination forever. So, it’s really just a question of when. It’s a question of how many more people will be killed, or have their lives destroyed, before the inevitable and inexorable finally comes to pass. Nothing else really matters, anymore. It’s about lives. There is no rationale. It’s just senseless death and destruction. And when it’s all over, the shattered and the scarred will never have a reason why.

We’re waiting for the heroes who will end this war. Many people are trying to end it, but a small handful will succeed. They will have the right strategy, at the right time, and suddenly the war will be over. Even until the last shot has been fired, it will seem that an end will never happen, that it is impossible; but it is not impossible, and it will happen. We will wonder that it was so obvious. We will wonder that no one before was able to get it done. We will wonder why it took so long. We will receive no answers.

There have been many heroes, in the cause of peace. Cindy Sheehan gave opposition to the war a diginified human face. Numerous veterans and veterans’ organizations give it their courage and sacrifice. Many Congressional Democrats have spent many sleepless nights trying to build the coalitions that, thus far, have failed to coalesce. They have done so even while being berated and derided by many who have no idea how hard they are working, behind the scenes. All of these efforts are noble. All of these efforts are sincere. None of these efforts has yet had the right strategy or the right political muscle to succeed.

The war cannot be won. Even its most ardent supporters no longer seem capable of even explaining what exactly victory would mean. And it just goes on and on. Death. Destruction. Murder. Mass murder- a war without cause or justification is nothing else. Those who started the war are responsible for every single death. For every single life that has been irrecovably damaged. For every tear that has fallen.

If history is a guide, those responsible for this war will never be held accountable- unless there is the sort of deity in which they claim to believe. If there is, they will discover that eternity is a very long time. But what matters most, now, is neither justice nor retribution. What matters most is that the war end. It must end. It will end. So, it ought to end as soon as possible. There is literally no reason for it not to.

If these words find their way to any federal officials, or to any who work for federal officials, I hope they will pause and think. I hope they will realize that it’s actually very simple. Someone needs to end this war. Those who do will be among the greatest heroes of our time. Those who will are out there, somewhere, right now. We’re waiting to find out who they are.

Via Kos:

“We are going to bring an end to this war and I will fight hard in the United States Senate to make sure we don’t pass any funding bill that does not have a deadline,” Obama told the crowd.

Big props to Senator Obama. Hurrah!

I don’t know what to say.  I read a diary over at Daily Kos by Robert Naiman saying that the death toll in Iraq has reached one million.  One million dead.  One million dead.

Maybe it’s just a coincidence. Maybe. But there’s good news from the Democrats, today, on a few different fronts.

First, and a hit tip to Granny Doc, the Associated Press is reporting:

Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner intends to run for the Senate next year, Democratic officials said Wednesday, assuring his party a competitive race for a seat long in Republican hands.

Warner scheduled an e-mail announcement of his plans for Thursday. The seat is currently held by Republican Sen. John Warner, who recently said he will retire at the end of his current term after 30 years in office.

This should be as close to a gimme as the Democrats will get, next year. Only Jeanne Shaheen, if she runs against Sununu in New Hampshire, should be as easy a pick-up. This would also mean two Democratic senators from formerly deep red Virginia.

But the news gets even better.

From Reuters:

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid vowed on Wednesday to block former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson from becoming attorney general if President George W. Bush nominates him to replace Alberto Gonzales.

Congressional and administration officials have described Olson as a leading contender for the job as chief U.S. law enforcement officer, but Reid declared, “Ted Olson will not be confirmed” by the Senate.

“He’s a partisan, and the last thing we need as an attorney general is a partisan,” Reid, a Nevada Democrat, told Reuters in a brief hallway interview on Capitol Hill.

Olson is very smart, and very connected, and his wife was murdered by the 9/11 terrorists, for which he deserves great sympathy, but he’s also a very sleazy man. Read a book about the actual right wing conspiracy that actually did hound the Clintons, and you’ll read about Ted Olson. He wouldn’t be the complete lapdog attorney general that Abu Gonzales was, but he might actually be worse. Because he can think for himself. And there is no reason to think he would be any more an honorable or professional attorney general than was Abu. Kudos to Senator Reid!

And then, there’s the sudden tough talk about Iraq…

I’ll let the report speak for itself. From USA Today:

On the eve of critical testimony to Congress by Gen. David Petraeus, most Americans are skeptical of what he will say and support setting a timetable to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq regardless of the military situation there.

A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday and Saturday finds that a White House push to spotlight progress in Iraq, including President Bush’s surprise stop in Anbar province last week, hasn’t fundamentally changed attitudes toward the war.

The propaganda isn’t working, and the American people aren’t being fooled.

A record 60% say the United States should set a timetable to withdraw forces “and stick to that timetable regardless of what is going on in Iraq.”

Regardless of what is going on. No excuses. No Friedman Units. No bullshit progress reports. Set a timetable and get out.

Of course, the Iraqi people might see it differently, right? Because all hell will break loose if we leave. Because all hell hasn’t yet broken loose. Right?

Let’s see…

Every time Osama bin Laden’s vile visage reappears on America’s television screens, the pundits hyperventilate with excited anticipation of the political benefits for Bush. John Kerry blames his 2004 defeat on bin Laden’s sudden reappearance, on tape, in the days before the election. The calcified conventional wisdom persists that when Americans are reminded of bin Laden and terrorism, they quiver in fear and cower for the cover of their big bad Republican protectors. This is, of course, at best, absurd. In 2004, some right wing shrillmongers even insisted that bin Laden was openly hoping for a Kerry victory. That exact presumptive political calculus actually explains bin Laden’s true motives.

When Bush needs a boost, bin Laden is there to lend a hand. Bin Laden is no fool, and he understands the foolishness of the American media. He understands that they will comply with his true desire, which is to bolster Bush and to help facilitate the continuance of Bush’s national security policies. Unlike the idiots in the American punditocracy, bin Laden is mockingly confident that whatever Bush does will be to bin Laden’s benefit. Never in American history has an American administration’s ineptitude so consistenly benefited America’s enemies.

Once again, because they need be continually explicated, these are the facts:

WaPo has a deceptive title on Bill Richardson’s Op Ed piece. They call it “Why We Should Leave Iraq Now.” It should be called “Watch Richardson Try TO Exploit ‘Differences’ on 2009 Iraq Policy and NOT Talk About Leaving Iraq Now.” Read the first three grafs of the piece:

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards have suggested that there is little difference among us on Iraq. This is not true: I am the only leading Democratic candidate committed to getting all our troops out and doing so quickly.

In the most recent debate, I asked the other candidates how many troops they would leave in Iraq and for what purposes. I got no answers. The American people need answers. If we elect a president who thinks that troops should stay in Iraq for years, they will stay for years — a tragic mistake.

Clinton, Obama and Edwards reflect the inside-the-Beltway thinking that a complete withdrawal of all American forces somehow would be “irresponsible.” On the contrary, the facts suggest that a rapid, complete withdrawal — not a drawn-out, Vietnam-like process — would be the most responsible and effective course of action.

The fact that there is a Congressional debate in Congress NOW on Iraq does not enter Richardson’s thinking in the least. I do not know about you, but I truly detest what Richardson is doing here, selfishly trying to make political hay for himself at the expense of the real issue NOW – the Congressional debate on Iraq. Richardson is my least favorite candidate right now.

I don’t write diaries much these days but I wanted to write this one this morning.  I don’t watch Fox News Republican debates,  I don’t even watch Fox News Democratic debates….heh! Sun Tzu is not impressed with my avoidance of knowing my enemy but did he get saddled with my gag reflex?  CNN was kind though this morning and while I was trimming my husband’s hair they put this clip up……Huckabee vs. Paul on the idea of an unsurge and leaving Iraq.  Mike Huckabee seems to know something about honor that I don’t.

Dear Senator Reid,

Who was it that, in February, said:

This war is a serious situation. It involves the worst foreign policy mistake in the history of this country.

Oh. Right. It was you.

Who was it that, in February, also said:

There can be no purely military solution in Iraq.

And:

At a time when President Bush is asking our troops to shoulder a larger and unsustainable burden policing a civil war, his failed policies have left us increasingly isolated in Iraq and less secure here at home.

Oh. Right. That was also you.

And who was it, in July, who was reported to have said: 

…he now saw ending the war as a moral duty, and even if the Senate again falls short… would turn again and again to Iraq until either the president relents or enough Republicans join Democrats to overrule Mr. Bush.

Yes. Again. You.

So, what has changed? Why are you now saying you will “compromise” with the Republicans, not to actually end the word, but to just put some meaningless babble into the next bill that will continue it? Could it be all the good news that’s recently come out of Iraq?