"Here's a different idea about that....

Perhaps you should consider the idea that labeling those killed Al-Qaeda serves the purpose of not being at war with all of Iraq.

How would you propose allying with the Sunni if is trumpeted that the US just killed a bunch of Sunni? The same goes for the Shia. That is the whole of Iraq right there. Isn't trying to cause the least offense to the people we are trying to help a good thing?"

-- shooter242

That's a legitimate question except that you're off on a tangent in a couple of places.

1) AlQaida is Sunni. Thus, if we were to ally with the Sunni faction (after invading and basically destroying their political organization) we would be allying with those who we allegedly invaded to overthrow. It would also mean that we're taking sides in a civil war and that's a good way to really bollock things up (as if we haven't already done that).

2) The other problem is that our press isn't supposed to be a propaganda arm of the government. If the government were to announce that sugar no longer causes cavities, would you expect the press to pass that along with no question regarding its legitimacy?

If not, why would you expect the press to pass along obviously incorrect descriptions of what is going on in Iraq. I can understand the desire to NOT report anything at all if it will truly (and legitimately) pose a danger to our troops, but this type of thing is a far cry from that.

In anycase, the press can paint this anyway they want and they'll still not be able to make a silk purse from this sow's ear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wm2OXQh3duI

Remember what it's all about.

RealName, is that you?

I've known Glenn probably longer than anyone here except Mona, and I can assure you that if impeachment was a practical solution to the current situation our country finds itself in, Glenn would probably volunteer his time to do pro bono work toward that goal.

Impeachment, at this time, won't solve a damned thing that the 2008 elections won't solve. There just isn't enough time to pull it off even if the Democrats had those elusive 60 votes in the Senate....which they don't have and won't get. The GOP didn't get where they are by being patsies. They know how the game is played and they're damned good at playing it.

That's just political fact.

There are currently ongoing, several dozen oversight hearings which either reach, or will reach, into the most important aspects of this administration's lawlessness and bring a lot of information to the public's attention. Habeas, privacy, torture, corruption.....all are in the hearing stages. It's not like Congress, as currently constituted, can wave a fucking magic want and Viola!, a Bill emerges which will correct things. It takes time to build coalitions and each subject requires a different coalition.

All of that work will be sidelined by an impeachment attempt which will be stalled until Bush leaves office anyway.

Why do it?

How do you propose to stop the war tomorrow?