For Dems only.

[kapkomet]

You assume that these people are going to destroy things only because the US is there? If we leave it will get WORSE, not better, because they are going to make damn sure to split Iraq in about 4 pieces. THAT is what this is about, not the US presence there.

[Balta1701]

You assume that these people are going to destroy things only because the US is there? If we leave it will get WORSE, not better, because they are going to make damn sure to split Iraq in about 4 pieces. THAT is what this is about, not the US presence there.

No, I don't assume that people are only destroying things because the U.S. is there. I am assuming instead that people are going to destroy things either way, but if there were absolutely no change in the casualties between us being there and us leaving, it would be advantageous for us to leave, simply based on the savings in blood and treasure. But, there are reasons to think that the presence of the U.S. forces has been a major flashpoint with a number of groups, both Sunni and Shia, and at least reducing that footprint might prove helpful.

 

Secondly, it'd be 3 pieces, not 4. And it's already in the process of happening anyway, the Kurds are practically off doing whatever they want already (including trying and succeeding in starting a war with Turkey), and both the Sunnis and the Shia are and succeeding in ethnically cleansing out their districts by turning the members of other religious sects into refugees. The breakup has already started, having U.S. troops there as both a target and as an inflammatory element simply isn't helping, and certainly isn't helping enough to be worth the entire efforts of the U.S. army at a time when other countries are rattling the saber.

[NorthSideSox72]

I've actually said from the beginning, if you are going to do this (which I wish they hadn't at all), you should allow at least the Kurds to break off and be their own country. Trying to keep these 3 distinct groups together in a whole Iraq is just another typical cold war, nation-state mentality mistake by this administration. Let there be a Kurdistan, and they are more likely to leave Turkey alone. The Shia/Sunni problem is a little more complicated, because they are now spread out over a lot of common territory. There is no longer going to be a good solution to that one.

 

And I'll also reiterate... we can't leave now. I agree with Kap and others that it would get much, much worse if we left. We made a mistake, and we need to clean it up.

[Balta1701]

I've actually said from the beginning, if you are going to do this (which I wish they hadn't at all), you should allow at least the Kurds to break off and be their own country. Trying to keep these 3 distinct groups together in a whole Iraq is just another typical cold war, nation-state mentality mistake by this administration. Let there be a Kurdistan, and they are more likely to leave Turkey alone. The Shia/Sunni problem is a little more complicated, because they are now spread out over a lot of common territory. There is no longer going to be a good solution to that one.

 

And I'll also reiterate... we can't leave now. I agree with Kap and others that it would get much, much worse if we left. We made a mistake, and we need to clean it up.

The moment that happens, it provokes a Turkey/Kurdistan war which may also involve Iran.

 

The absolute last thing Turkey would ever want is an independent Kurdistan. They're already bombing Kurds inside Iraq as retaliation for acts by kurdish groups inside of Turkey. Iran could get involved also in such a conflict, as all 3 countries have significant Kurdish areas. And then of course there's the Kirkuk question...Saddam expelled a bunch of Kurds from this oil-rich city and replaced them with other Muslims to try to better control the city...so who gets that city and all of its oil in any partition?

[NorthSideSox72]

The moment that happens, it provokes a Turkey/Kurdistan war which may also involve Iran.

 

The absolute last thing Turkey would ever want is an independent Kurdistan. They're already bombing Kurds inside Iraq as retaliation for acts by kurdish groups inside of Turkey. Iran could get involved also in such a conflict, as all 3 countries have significant Kurdish areas. And then of course there's the Kirkuk question...Saddam expelled a bunch of Kurds from this oil-rich city and replaced them with other Muslims to try to better control the city...so who gets that city and all of its oil in any partition?

 

As I said, I believe that if there is an independent Kurdistan, then the incursions into Turkey will stop. So, I believe the opposite of what you suggest is true. I think the primary motivation of the Kurds at this point is to obtain independence.

[Balta1701]

As I said, I believe that if there is an independent Kurdistan, then the incursions into Turkey will stop. So, I believe the opposite of what you suggest is true. I think the primary motivation of the Kurds at this point is to obtain independence.

I agree that is their primary motivation, an independent, functioning state. The problem is, any independent Kurdistan would either steal territory from Iran and Turkey or would create a minority across the border that wants to join the independent Kurdistan in both countries. That is a dangerous proposition.

[NorthSideSox72]

I agree that is their primary motivation, an independent, functioning state. The problem is, any independent Kurdistan would either steal territory from Iran and Turkey or would create a minority across the border that wants to join the independent Kurdistan in both countries. That is a dangerous proposition.

I still disagree. I think an independent Kurdistan gives those minorities in Iran and Turkey a new option - one which is much more appealing than the current Iraq.

[Balta1701]

I love these guys. They've hurt the United States of America so much...we'll be regretting their idiocy for decades.

 

Months before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld forbade military strategists from developing plans for securing a post-war Iraq, the retiring commander of the Army Transportation Corps said Thursday.

 

In fact, said Brig. Gen. Mark Scheid, Rumsfeld said "he would fire the next person" who talked about the need for a post-war plan.

 

Rumsfeld did replace Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff in 2003, after Shinseki told Congress that hundreds of thousands of troops would be needed to secure post-war Iraq.

 

Scheid, who is also the commander of Fort Eustis in Newport News, made his comments in an interview with the Daily Press. He retires in about three weeks.

 

Scheid doesn't go so far as calling for Rumsfeld to resign. He's listened as other retired generals have done so.

 

"Everybody has a right to their opinion," he said. "But what good did it do?"

 

Scheid's comments are further confirmation of the version of events reported in "Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq," the book by New York Times reporter Michael R. Gordon and retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Bernard E. Trainor.

 

In 2001, Scheid was a colonel with the Central Command, the unit that oversees U.S. military operations in the Mideast.

 

On Sept. 10, 2001, he was selected to be the chief of logistics war plans.

[NorthSideSox72]

I love these guys. They've hurt the United States of America so much...we'll be regretting their idiocy for decades.

I'm as mad as anyone with the way the war was handled - and the fact that it happened at all. But I have a hard time believing that Rumsfeld would issue an edict preventing any sort of post-war planning. That is just so assinine, and Rumsfeld may be many things, but he's not that stupid.

 

I'd venture a guess that this is contextual. For example: during the planning sessions for the invasion and securing phases, which the transportation guy would have been in, Rumsfeld wants THOSE answers. Some generals, rightly fearing what will happen afterwards, start spending too much time for Rummy's liking on those subjects. Rummy tells them to stick to the job they are assiged. That, to me, sounds like him.

 

But I must admit, this is just conjecture and a strong gut feeling. Maybe Rumsfeld was that stupid. I just kind of doubt it.

[Balta1701]

It's really a shame the refs had to ruin that game. I mean, that just had to make these guys feel so angry...

 

Halliburton Co. executives ordered a big-screen television and 10 large tubs of tacos, chicken wings and cheese sticks delivered to Iraq for last year's Super Bowl, then billed U.S. taxpayers for their party, according to a lawsuit unsealed Friday.

 

The Houston-based company also defrauded the government by double- and triple-billing for Internet, food and gym services for soldiers, according to the lawsuit by a former employee for KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary that runs dining halls for troops in Iraq.

 

"The administration is not enforcing the laws against fraud when it comes to contractors in Iraq," said Alan Grayson, the attorney who filed the suit. "When it comes to seeing that the law is executed, the Bush administration is a no-show."

 

Halliburton denied the allegations, filed under the False Claims Act. Designed to prevent war profiteering, such lawsuits allow citizens to sue on behalf of the government and recover a portion of any damages.

 

The company did not deny ordering the TV and the food; it set up snack buffets and screenings at military bases throughout Iraq for the 2005 Super Bowl. But KBR noted that its contract allowed the firm to provide recreation and morale-boosting services for its employees and for American soldiers.

[Rex Kickass]

Anybody remember the wreath laying ceremony at the reflective pool in Ground Zero yesterday? Present were Mayor Bloomberg, Governor Pataki, the President and First Lady.

 

Where were New York's Senate Delegation? Uninvited, according to the American Prospect.

 

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/2006/09/post_1371.html#006242

 

Of course putting two elected Democrats next to four Republicans will mess up the campaign photo.

[Balta1701]

Hannity: Why would we use the Geneva Conventions as our standard, number one, and why would we confer rights to enemy combatants, considering we’ve never done that before?

 

Gonzales: Well, we’re not saying the Geneva Convention provides the standards here. But the president never intended that we would detain people indefinitely if we didn’t have to. The president fundamentally believes that in certain cases it is best to bring people to justice, particularly those involved, the masterminds of the 9/11 Commission, if we can bring them to justice, we ought to try to do so, he believes that would bring some level of closure to some of the families of the victims

link with audio.

[Balta1701]

 

I guess the focus groups said that calling it the Macaca rally was a bad idea.

[Soxy]

 

I guess the focus groups said that calling it the Macaca rally was a bad idea.

So, where is Macaca?

 

 

 

This seems like the appropriate time to say: hurray for the Daily Show and Colbert Report being back!

[Balta1701]

The IAEA slammed a Congressional report which tried to spin its way into concluding that Iran was rapidly developing nuclear weapons.

[Damen]

The IAEA slammed a Congressional report which tried to spin its way into concluding that Iran was rapidly developing nuclear weapons.

 

In relation to that, here's a nice catch showing our liberal media at work. Give front page status to another bogus Republican Intel report, and bury it on page 17 when the IAEA debunks it.

 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/...6_09/009496.php

[Balta1701]

How industry predictions came true, and 30 years of environmentalism in California totally destroyed that state's economy. (except...they didn't).

 

Edited September 15, 2006 by Balta1701

[Balta1701]

I'm so glad the adults are back in charge. What a great foreign policy team. Dy-no-mite!

 

After the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003, the opportunity to participate in the U.S.-led effort to reconstruct Iraq attracted all manner of Americans -- restless professionals, Arabic-speaking academics, development specialists and war-zone adventurers. But before they could go to Baghdad, they had to get past Jim O'Beirne's office in the Pentagon.

 

To pass muster with O'Beirne, a political appointee who screens prospective political appointees for Defense Department posts, applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

 

O'Beirne's staff posed blunt questions to some candidates about domestic politics: Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000? Do you support the way the president is fighting the war on terror? Two people who sought jobs with the U.S. occupation authority said they were even asked their views on Roe v. Wade .

 

Many of those chosen by O'Beirne's office to work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq's government from April 2003 to June 2004, lacked vital skills and experience. A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.

[mr_genius]

What do you guys think about Jim Webb? I thought he did a good job on Meet The Press

[NorthSideSox72]

What do you guys think about Jim Webb? I thought he did a good job on Meet The Press

I don't know much about him yet. What did you like?

[Rex Kickass]

He handed Senator Macaca his ass.

[Balta1701]

So, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's followed the case of Maher Arar, the Canadian citizen who was grabbed by U.S. authorities at an airport in 2002, held without charges, and shipped to Syria to be tortured as an ally of terrorists.

 

So, the Canadian government conducted an investigation into whether any charges or holding of him was appropriate, and here are the results.

 

Canadian intelligence officials passed false warnings and bad information to American agents about a Muslim Canadian citizen, after which U.S. authorities secretly whisked him to Syria, where he was tortured, a judicial report found Monday.

 

The report, released in Ottawa, was the result of a 2 1/2-year inquiry that represented one of the first public investigations into mistakes made as part of the United States' "extraordinary rendition" program, which has secretly spirited suspects to foreign countries for interrogation by often brutal methods.

 

The inquiry, which focused on the Canadian intelligence services, found that agents who were under pressure to find terrorists after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, falsely labeled an Ottawa computer consultant, Maher Arar, as a dangerous radical. They asked U.S. authorities to put him and his wife, a university economist, on the al-Qaeda "watchlist," without justification, the report said.

 

Arar was also listed as "an Islamic extremist individual" who was in the Washington area on Sept. 11. The report concluded that he had no involvement in Islamic extremism and was on business in San Diego that day, said the head of the inquiry commission, Ontario Justice Dennis O'Connor.

 

Arar, now 36, was detained by U.S. authorities as he changed planes in New York on Sept. 26, 2002. He was held for questioning for 12 days, then flown by jet to Jordan and driven to Syria. He was beaten, forced to confess to having trained in Afghanistan -- where he never has been -- and then kept in a coffin-size dungeon for 10 months before he was released, the Canadian inquiry commission found.

 

O'Connor concluded that "categorically there is no evidence" that Arar did anything wrong or was a security threat.

 

Although the report centered on Canadian actions, the counsel for the commission, Paul Cavalluzzo, said the results show that the U.S. practice of renditions "ought to be reviewed."

 

"This is really the first report in the Western world that has had access to all of the government documents we wanted and saw the practice of extraordinary rendition in full color," he said in an interview from Ottawa. "The ramifications were that an innocent Canadian was tortured, his life was put upside down, and it set him back years and years."

So, based on an unconfirmed report that didn't even come from our own intelligence serivices, the U.S. used a "rendition" to send a man abroad for beatings and torture of all sorts.

 

Clearly, the President needs more of this power, otherwise, there may still be innocent people who aren't tortured.

[NorthSideSox72]

So, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's followed the case of Maher Arar, the Canadian citizen who was grabbed by U.S. authorities at an airport in 2002, held without charges, and shipped to Syria to be tortured as an ally of terrorists.

 

So, the Canadian government conducted an investigation into whether any charges or holding of him was appropriate, and here are the results.

 

So, based on an unconfirmed report that didn't even come from our own intelligence serivices, the U.S. used a "rendition" to send a man abroad for beatings and torture of all sorts.

 

Clearly, the President needs more of this power, otherwise, there may still be innocent people who aren't tortured.

That is really disturbing.

[Balta1701]

In the grand tradition of Mike Brown...who went from running an Arabian Horse Trading association to the head of FEMA...

 

George W. Bush has decided to appoint a special envoy to Darfur from the U.S. to try to alleviate the disaster there. His choice? Andrew Natsios. Who is this guy?

 

– As director of U.S. Agency for Intenational Development Natsios promised that the U.S. contribution to reconstruction of Iraq would be no more that $1.6 billion. Congress has already appropriated nearly $20 billion for reconstruction in Iraq. The CBO estimates the total cost of reconstruction will be between $50 and $100 billion.

 

– Natsios was the manager of Boston’s “Big Dig,” widely considered one of the most mismanaged public works projects in history.

Yes, that's right, the guy who told us Iraq would cost the U.S. $1.6 billion, and the guy who managed that wonderful program that all conservatives everywhere love...Boston's Big Dig...is the guy who's gonna stop the genocide in Darfur.

[kapkomet]

I think I'm actually going to vote for Chris Bell, a Democrat running for Texas governor. He has a lot of good ideas, and makes a lot of sense.

 

I haven't studied all of his positions, but I like his education and spending ideas.