Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by tw

But then we have leaders so short on intelligence as to even increase a subordinates pay from $130,000 to about $195,000 per year just for sex

WTF is this referring to?

[Happy Monkey]

Wolfowitz put his girlfriend on the fast track in the World Bank. More than that- she got raises well past the limit.

[tw]

Remember who Wolfowitz is. He originated and campaigned extensively for "Mission Accomplished". An agenda still strongly advocated by this administration's neocons in direct opposition to the Iraq Study Group. Wolfowitz today was caught again lying; this time about his letter to a Vice President for Human Resources. Of course. He is completely representative of those who believe "the message" justifies the means. Or as was argued back in Nam: the ends justifies the means.

Lying to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to protect 'your' oil: acceptable. Lying to have the World Bank pay another $50,000 per year for Wolfowitz's sex: also acceptable especially when it is 'your' World Bank. Lying about a free and consensual blow job if you are a Democrat? Impeachable.

As so many military analysts have noted, 'the message' has even resulted in American soldier deaths. But then another righteous administration also had same contempt for 30,000 American soldiers in Nam.

Notice what constitutes 'morality' - a direct snub in the face of anyone who calls themselves religious and yet remains silent about these so moral administration officials - both recent and current.

I don't believe in morality. I believe those who advocate morality are the reason why the World Bank was paying an additional $50,000 per year for Wolfowitz's "nappy headed ho".

So where did they move her? Protected in the State Department to work for Wolfowitz's 'moral' peers. Why are the religious among us so silent? After all, Wolfwitz is what we once called the 'moral majority'.

Clinton did not pay for his sex. Wolfowitz did with the bank's money. Clinton confronts impeachment? Then Wolfowitz should be facing capital punishment. Oh. Wolfowitz is from the moral party. Therefore he should be punished less severely than Don Imus?

Funny. Don Imus exercised his 1st Amendment rights and gets punished far more severely. Wolfowitz's even overtly lied to kill hundred of thousands and make refugees of 4 million. Therefore he may not even suffer punishment as severe as Imus'? Justice has a double standard? Yes as long as your supporters are so 'moral'.

Moral to me is how the most hateful people justify their own crimes and protect their own at the expense of mankind. $50,000 annually to buy sex for Wolfowitz. As moral as a pedophile Catholic priest. Double standard.

[tw]

It's not just that Wolfowitz exercised questionable activities for the benefit of his 'nappy headed ho'. He also lied repeatedly about doing these things.

Shaha Riza would see her income rise from $130,000 to $244,000 which his $20,000 higher than the maximum for her pay grade. But then having a moral boss can be so profitable.

Wolfowitz Dictated Girlfriend's Pay Deal
World Bank Board Weighs Its Options
Just too many details to summarize anything here. Read the long list of 'moral' decisions from a founding member of Project for a New American Century.

In hip hop, it is acceptable to 'have a ho in every state'. Clearly when a bank president has only one ho in Washington, well, that's good and moral? Same double standard also justified Wolfowitz's lies about Saddam's WMDs. Clearly he is more moral this time because he only had one ho and the bank - not he - paid for her.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

In Vietnam, tw, the end was to prevent the grip of the bad religion, Communism, from tightening around the throat of the Vietnamese. This is an end of most excellent nobility and humanity, no?

You, of course, complain of how many Communist cultists die to achieve this end.

That is why you suck so very bad. You wanted and want the bad religion to misrule our world.

[tw]

Reality was obvious in 2004 when insurgents (that myth promoters called Al Qaeda) could spend all morning adjusting their mortars with a transit in a neighborhood adjacent to Abu Ghriad. Why? Because no Iraqis would report the insurgents or their planned attack on Abu Ghriad. Those who 'assumed' Americans were so welcome as liberators had to completely ignore these so obvious details. Insurgents could spend all morning setting up for an attack while MPs in Abu Ghriad never knew an attack was coming. Everyone else knew it because Americans were not welcome - despite American domestic propaganda.

Again, the details are damning. This sounds too much like Vietnam. From the NY Times of 16 Apr 2007:

Attacks Surge as Iraq Militants Overshadow City
They maneuver in squads, like the American infantrymen they try to kill. One squad fires furiously so another can attack from a better position. They operate in bad weather, knowing American helicopters and surveillance drones are grounded. Some carry G.P.S. receivers so mortar teams can calculate the coordinates of American armored vehicles. They kidnap and massacre police officers. ...

As the insurgent ranks have swelled, attacks on American troops have soared. ...

On the ground in Baquba, it is not hard to see why. Despite recent seizures of stockpiles, the insurgents have a ready supply of artillery shells and material to make bombs, the biggest killer of American troops here. Some bombs destroy American vehicles. Some are used to booby-trap houses to crash down on Americans. Some are used in larger battle plans: Before overrunning an Iraqi Army outpost south of Baquba, guerrillas laid bombs on the road that Iraqi and American forces would later use to try to rescue the outpost. The minefield blocked the reinforcements, and the Iraqi soldiers at the outpost fled.

The guerrillas seem increasingly well organized and trained. An insurgent force trying to overrun an American outpost in southern Baquba was repelled only after American soldiers fired more than 2,000 Coke-bottle-size rounds from Bradley fighting vehicles and 13,000 rounds from M-240 machine guns. ...

Fighters from the Mahdi Army, the Shiite militia largely loyal to Moktada al-Sadr, the anti-American cleric, have also flooded north from Baghdad and now control villages west of Baquba and north of Sadr City. ...

Shiite-dominated security forces in the city inflamed tensions by persecuting Sunnis, but remain ill prepared to fight the insurgents without support of American forces. Basic government services like food and fuel deliveries have collapsed. ...

With areas like Zaganiya receiving little attention, insurgent ranks grew unchecked. Eight of the 300 soldiers in the Fifth Squadron of the 73rd Cavalry Regiment have been killed near Zaganiya since they arrived in March to secure the village. The squadron has been sweeping the area northeast of Baquba, while the Fifth Battalion of the 20th Infantry Regiment rushed north from Taji in March to reinforce Baquba....

At one newly built outpost in Baquba, nicknamed Disneyland, soldiers staff lookouts and sniper posts and sleep on cots. They say they control little outside the tall concrete barriers. "You see anybody out there with binoculars, you light them up!" ...

Deja vue Nam.

But the Iraqi soldiers said that most Iraqis assigned to the outpost had fled, kicking back some of their pay to commanders to avoid punishment. ...

The Iraqi soldiers fretted that the insurgents had better equipment compared with their two clips and rickety Kalashnikov rifles. Like Baquba’s residents, they are intimidated. An Iraqi, Sgt. Raad Rashid, said his countrymen would flee if Americans abandoned the outpost. "Twenty minutes later we'd be gone," he said. "They would surround this place and kill us."

[tw]

As the president declared we were winning, attacks on American increased - in Nam. They tell us the surge is working. Well, protection measures have now been increased even in the Green Zone - only place in Baghdad considered save for Americans. From ABC News of 9 May 2007:

U.S. Embassy: Wear Flak Jackets, Helmets
U.S. Embassy Workers in Iraq Ordered to Put on Flak Vests, Helmets if Outdoors in Green Zone
A sharp increase in mortar attacks on the Green Zone the one-time oasis of security in Iraq's turbulent capital has prompted the U.S. Embassy to issue a strict new order telling all employees to wear flak vests and helmets while in unprotected buildings or whenever they are outside. ...

The increase in mortar attacks comes despite the presence of tens of thousands more American and Iraqi soldiers in the streets of Baghdad as part of the security crackdown ordered by President Bush in January.

The vest and helmet security order was issued May 3, one day after four Asian contract workers working for the U.S. government were killed when rockets or mortars slammed into the Green Zone.

[tw]

Almost one in three Americans still support a mental midget and his "Mission Accomplished". Every general who served in Iraq and since retired has spoken out against his war. The Iraq Study Group defined an effective solution to minimize a resulting defeat – as the Wise Men did in Vietnam when we also ignored them to massacre 30,000 more American soldiers.

Generals are doing what any patriotic America would do: tell the truth. Necessary to protect American troops. From ABC News of 9 May 2007:

Political Punch
General Discontent
In an act of defiance perhaps not seen since President Truman fired Gen. Douglas MacArthur, today the anti-war veterans group VoteVets.org, which has been influential with Capitol Hill Democrats, is launching a half-million-dollar TV ad campaign featuring Maj Gen John Batiste (Ret.), former commanding general of the first infantry division in Iraq. ...

Batiste then appears, saying, "Mr. President, you did not listen. You continue to pursue a failed strategy that is breaking our great Army and Marine Corps. I left the Army in protest in order to speak out. Mr. President, you have placed our nation in peril. Our only hope is that Congress will act now to protect our fighting men and women."

Remember George Jr is a fool who promotes a mythical worldwide terror organization that he calls Al Qaeda. Terrorist cells led by bin Laden are conjugating even in Cherry Hill NJ. Oh. These terrorists could not even discover that their automatic weapons would not work?

So why did George Jr make no effort to go after bin Laden? He even eliminated the Alec Station whose only function was to get bin Laden. Better for George Jr, politically, to have bin Laden alive. Reality - only threat to Americans in Iraq is ... George Jr. Phony threats such as Al Qaeda will keep the naive from learning reality.

An obvious reality exists as even demonstrated by Cellar Dwellers in The impending Veto. The United States has no smoking gun to justify "Mission Accomplished", has no strategic objective, and has no exit strategy. Confronted by this reality, supporters of George Jr cannot deny it. US no longer even has a Division Ready Brigade.

Hearsay according to those who support the troops. Irrelevant to ‘big dic’ thinkers who only see things in terms of military explosions such as ‘shock and awe’ (as if that had any strategic significance). Latter cannot see the difference between a tactical objective and a strategic one. After all, ‘shock and awe’ was big explosion. Therefore it must have accomplished something strategic.

This missing strategic objective was defined even four years ago here in The Cellar. How many dwellers noticed that reality back then?

Four years later and wacko extremists still cannot find an objective? Five years later and still no attempt to get bin Laden? Still they promote this mythical worldwide Al Qaeda lurking everywhere to kill us all? Yes - because it serves George Jr to lie. One in three have so much contempt for the America soldier as to ignore reality. More important is George Jr’s legacy.

Tonight on PBS News Hour, Sen Olympia Snow (R-Maine) even defines the problem. Every commander in Iraq that she talked to – everyone – said that a military victory cannot win this war. Of course. So obvious even from Sze Tzu’s book of 2500 years ago. What Senator Snow says is doctrine from Military Science 101.

Condi Rice was on Charlie Rose recently. Charlie pressed her constantly on their alternative plan should the Maliki government fail (and it is slowly losing supporters). Finally, Rice conceded that George Jr's administration had no alternative plan because their plan was to not fail. "Mission Accomplished". That was Charlie Rose on 7 May 2007.

Any war - including "Mission Accomplished" - is a defeat without a strategic objective. Even Gen Patraeus admits his effort is only a tactical objective intended to give Maliki time to establish a viable government. IOW Americans cannot win "Mission Accomplished". No strategic objective. Americans can only stall for time. Therefore the war will not be lost on George Jr's watch. Why is this obvious? What is the strategic objective? Crickets.

Moderate (intelligent) Republicans are realizing reality. A consensus is building in Congress among moderates (intelligent) and Democrats that September should be the cutoff date. Screw Condi Rice who never had a plan - even when warned repeatedly of terrorist threats in 2001. The legacy of George Jr – America’s worst president in 100 years. At least Nixon was smart enough to know he was lying. What should we expect when President Cheney tells him what to think?

[tw]

What is a strategic objective? This basic military / political concept is demonstrated using a well known historical event in The impending Veto .

[richlevy]

It looks like the GOP finally had an intervention.

G.O.P. Moderates Warn Bush Iraq Must Show Gains WASHINGTON, May 9 — Moderate Republicans gave President Bush a blunt warning on his Iraq policy at a private White House meeting this week, telling the president that conditions needed to improve markedly by fall or more Republicans would desert him on the war.
The White House session demonstrated the grave unease many Republicans are feeling about the war, even as they continue to stand with the president against Democratic efforts to force a withdrawal of forces through a spending measure that has been a flash point for weeks.
Participants in the Tuesday meeting between Mr. Bush, senior administration officials and 11 members of a moderate bloc of House Republicans said the lawmakers were unusually candid with the president, telling him that public support for the war was crumbling in their swing districts.
One told Mr. Bush that voters back home favored a withdrawal even if it meant the war was judged a loss. Representative Tom Davis told Mr. Bush that the president’s approval rating was at 5 percent in one section of his northern Virginia district.

Of course, some people just don't get it. On Scarborough Country tonight, Michael Reagan criticized generals who criticized the war saying that they shouldn't criticize unless they can come up with something other than 'cut and run'.

That is an amazingly stupid argument. It's like saying you can't stop a truck driver from driving drunk unless you can show that you know how to drive his truck. If the only two choices are leaving or brining back the draft and sending in 500,000 troops, is that what the generals have to propose?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Meanwhile...

And: . . .

[Urbane Guerrilla]

And what doesn't have much to do with post #536, so it's post #537: the Democratic Party is in this unseemly hurry to lose a war with non-democrats, a/k/a fascists, the Ba'ath-Fascist connection starting with the WW2-era Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and continuing since -- and thus the Democratic Party gives the most profound lie to even its name.

The problem is chronic. Was it or was it not a Democratic-controlled Congress that cut off munitions funds to South Vietnam, guaranteeing thereby the Communist North's victory and the hellish conditions that anyone with half an eye could see coming as a direct result of the Communist victory? Is it or is it not a Democratic-controlled Congress trying to get the war lost, again by defunding, just as rapidly as may be? These people do not have the Republic's interest either in mind or at heart, and do not deserve any American's support. To support these despot-loving boobs, you must be stupider even than they.

Guess who's not that stupid.

The only Democrats presently worth a damn are the registered Democrats in uniform. These and only these Democrats are acting in the Republic's interest.

[glatt]

Urbane, you talk as if we haven't already lost the war.

It may be an uncomfortable truth, and one you don't want to admit, but that doesn't change it. Look at basic facts. Our troops live on a heavily fortified base. When we leave the base we are attacked. We go out into Iraq, perform a mission, and then return to the base to sleep. When we return to the base, it's as if we hadn't gone out into the country at all, because the insurgency comes right back as soon as we leave. We have no long term impact on the situation outside the base. If we were making progress, it would be a different story. Please point to any progress we have made in Iraq.

I know you are afraid to admit it, but we lost this one. The longer we take to admit what is obvious, the more troops will die. The more men will come home on gurneys to shattered lives. How many lives would you destroy for nothing?

The timing of the Democrats is horrible. They should have opposed this war before it started. They were spineless wimps for not standing up to Bush back then. But it's better late than never.

[Griff]

That sounds familiar.

[SadistSecret]

I've been paying attention to all this (The Iraq part of the war), and ALWAYS wondered why, exactly, we were fighting in the first place.