I hope you folks understand the phrase, "invested in defeat". It describes the politics of those that want the country to fail. That NEED it to fail, in order to advance their agenda. One can certainly understand dissent, disagreement, and different directions, but this is just loud, angry, denial that anything positive is possible.

Consider the reactions here. No "wait and see", no "it would be nice if true". The sentiment is outrage and defensiveness that any progress is possible. Glenn worked all night to find something to illustrate that these people are closet neocons, but found little to concoct smears. Is that all you people have to offer? Backbiting and character assassination?

I have no idea if what they say is true, nor does anyone else here. We haven't been to Iraq. But I hope it's true.

Maybe you folks should think about the idea, that requires failure of the country to make you happy. Whatever you choose to believe about how we got here is not terribly relevant anymore. Bush isn't running again. What you choose to believe about how to make this better IS relevant, as is the choice to root for surrender.

I hope you understand the expression "war of aggression":

Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal. Adopted by the International Law Commission of the United Nations, 1950.

Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

1. Crimes against peace:

1. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
2. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

2. War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
3. Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

The country failed when it invaded Iraq. How we got here is quite relevant. What part of "war of aggression" and "war crime" don't you understand?

Seebury has seen fit to copy and paste a list that is a mainstay of right wing blogs which purports to show that prominent Democrats spoke out about Iraq's WMD in advance of the invasion. Since seebarry has demonstrated to the satisfaction of all that he (or she) has no capacity for making critical judgments, it is worthwhile putting these quotations into context and into historical perspective. For a full and complete analyis see <http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp>. The following is a brief summary. The quotations break into two clearly defined groups:

• A group of quotations from 1998 (2-17-98, 2-18-98, 2-18-98, 10-9-98, 12-16-98), principally from the executive branch (the early ones), with the two later ones being from the legislature
• A group of quotations from 2001-2002, with the majority being in the fall of 2002 (12-5-01, 9-12-02, 9-23-02, 9-27-02, 10-9-02, 10-10-02), all from the legislative branch.

The first group, from 1998, represent the time when Saddam expelled the inspectors in 1998 and culminate with Operation Desert Fox, December 16-19, 1998.

The second group, the vast majority of which come from September and October 2002, represent the Bush administration's roll-out of their new product, the all-new, improved invasion of Iraq. These quotations reflect the intelligence that the legislature was provided by the executive. The legislative branch has no intelligence agencies, foreign intelligence collection being an executive branch function. The quotations from the members of the legislature, then, can only reflect the intelligence that the executive branch has provided them. These quotations make it quite clear what the legislature was being told by the executive.

Seabreeze is probably incapable of understanding this analysis since the list is distributed as a "gotcha" by the right wing inferiorstructure and occasionally some dimwitted troll pastes it here (daleyrocks and shooter have both posted it in the past, and now seabray) thinking that it proves something that it doesn't and without realizing what it actually proves (namely, that the executive severely misinformed the legislative branch in September and October of 2002 in order to force a favorable vote on the AUMF against Iraq with the help of the pressure of the November 2002 election.

Constitution of the United States of America

Article II, Section 2, paragraph 1

The President ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Even as is, July 2007 has been the bloodiest July so far in terms of fatalities since the war began.

Second bloodiest — 78 troops lost in July 2005. Still, casualties tend to be lower in both July and August. For those who have no idea what the area is like, it gets bloody hot there in the summer.