need anyone say more?

I just got through reading Sheehy's "The Accidental Candidate." I had read only excerpts until tonight.

Lord. No-one can say we weren't warned just who and what GW was.

And now? Now he's going to try to have it both ways in Baghdad, just like that little pig has tried to have it both ways his whole miserable life. Eight years as president of the United States, and he's fucked things up as badly as a person could, short of nuclear war. And he's not out of office yet. Who knows?

Obviously, what we'd like to see is someone doing the right thing and doing it competently. Either doing the wrong thing but doing it competently or doing the right thing incompetently is worse but survivable. But doing the wrong thing, and fucking even that up (but not in a way that negates it and turns it into the right thing) is a consistent pattern with this administration and this president.

We need to go back to Donnie and his wisdoms of the knowns ...

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

From the dude who got us into this mess.

Google it. Do-it-yourself impeachment.

It's time, really. No one can still be sleeping, can they..?

It's the only answer. The problem with impeachment is that it's a stately, time-consuming process. The only thing that really makes sense is to drag Bush and Cheney (along with Rice) out of the White House and into early retirement. Forget criminal charges, war crimes charges, etc. Just get them out of there, now, before they do more damage.

...that the dual command structure allows our soldiers to be put in harm's way by a leaky, corrupt Iraqi chain of command.

The dissent among the "hawks" may be the undoing of the entire Bush criminal operation. The path is simple.

First, it has to be recognized that the Bush regime is first, last, and always a criminal operation. As such, everything this regime plans, promotes, and executes is criminal in nature. Thus, the "Surge" is a plan with criminal intent. The question, in the immortal words of that great sage Robert Wagner ("It takes a thief"), is where's the scam?

The scam is pretty easy to figure out. The "Surge" keeps the momentum alive for Invading Iran. Like the invasion of Iraq, it would not be for any reason of necessity or protection from threat. Even stealing the oil, though a fringe benefit, would not be the main reason.

The purpose for invading Iran is for the Bush crime family to cover its trail. It's the next phase of a planetary Ponzi scheme. If the invasion and occupation of Iraq, euphemistically known as the "Iraq war," fails, then the momentum of criminality of this regime starts to flow in reverse. The lies, the no-bid contracts, the missing billions of dollars, the killing of journalists, and the myriad of crimes that we only suspect will become center stage.

Like a snowball, the criminal negligence before and afte Hurricane Katrina, the criminal negligence before and after September 11, 2001, the elections of 2000 and 2004, the involvement with Jack Abramoff, the involvement with Tom DeLay, the Energy Task Force, and on and on and on.

And what really happened to Osama bin Laden?

Bush and his fellow gang members fear greatly the loss and/or reversal of momentum that will likely bring the long arm of the law reaching for them. So they must have their "Surge." They must have their invasion.

Ah, the irony of it all. The Bush crime family. They "swiftboated" McCain before the term swiftboating was part of our vocabulary. Now he controls their destiny. I have never cared much for John McCain, but right now I wouldn't mind being in his shoes, for a while at least.

While the issue of dual command brought up in this article is a worthy critique of the "surge" plan, Salon's not doing anyone any good by purporting the notion that Fred Kagan is a credible expert. I could explain all this myself, but it's already been done quite effectively over at talkingpointsmemo:

Just a note on Fred Kagan – the guy is not an expert on insurgency, civil war, or stability ops. He has a Ph.D in history, with a focus on the 19th century Russian military. His major scholarly book is on Napoleon from 1801-5. From what I can tell, he has no serious background studying the issues that are at the core of his “surge” plan (his AEI bio page is below). So I am completely baffled by the extent to which the media has given him credibility as a “military expert”; one imagines how the surge would have been received if Kagan was accurately identified as “an expert on Napoleon and the early 19th century Russian army.” His CV reveals no publications in refereed history or political science journals in the last decade. Basically the intellectual architect of the surge is an oped/Weekly Standard writer whose only substantive expertise is on Napoleon. Great. . . .

And it gets better.

BelgraviaDispatch notes that Kagan seems to have trimmed his necessary number for the surge from 80,000 to 30,000 over the three and a half weeks from early to late December. They've got him kowtowing so bad you'd think the White House were a tenure committee.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/011921.php

...AEI, a hawkish Washington think tank.

Hawk ish? No, no, our feathered friends at AEI are the genuine article; they actually divebomb rodents for dinner.

The most serious flaw in the President's newest same-old-same-old is that it was wrong to begin with. It was wrong morally, intelligence-wise, strategically. It was even more than wrong: it was a red herring laid in the path of public opinion and the US Congress, in order to accomplish obscure and basically evil goals totally contrary to our national character and national interest. The fact that those who started out supporting both the idiot war and the "surge" which resembles nothing so much as the first wave of a seemingly never-ending series of surges into Viet Nam are now finding fault with the clearly moronic dual-command structure is barely worth note, given the monstrously flawed rationale for the original invasion.

If there is anything at all worth drawing from this latest development it isn't that it won't work but that nothing will work in this Crusade because there is no target, no reason and no moral basis underlying any of it. We are now truly beating a dead horse. If it delights some of us at first to realize that even supporters of this war are now realizing it is being conducted by a fool, it only underscores how long we have all played the fool by not rising up at the outset instead of only recently, to try and stop this atrocity.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? So far well over 163,000 and counting.