Note by Jeff: I’ll be headed back to the front lines in Iraq this August and September to report from the battlefront while the debate in Congress and the testimony of Gen. Petraeus rage on. More information can be found here.


  1. Bull Moose says:


  2. Bill Arp says:

    I want to kick this off by saying I am a god fearing christian man but there is something inherently wrong with the lenses for which the Bull Moose is looking through.

    I am no fan of Iraq and certainly support our military. However lets look at what has happened.

    We entered Iraq because we were afraid that they had weapons of mass destruction and if they sought to use them on the United States it could cause GRAVE danger on the United States (yes Grave Danger)

    Iraq did not bomb the World Trade Center, it was Al Qaeda.

    It has been shown that there are cells of Al Qaeada in Iraq. However there is more AL Qaeda cells in Afganistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Lebanon, and even Israel than in Iraq. And furthermore Sadam Hussein had a secular government that was is not way connected to Al Qaeda infulence.

    So now that we have dispelled the flagrant lie that the world trade centers bombing was a reason to attack Iraq, we must fall back on the current administrations reasoning that Iraq has weapons on mass destruction.

    If you are telling me we our satellite cameras that give us such functionality as google earth, our modern aviation techniques, and our infared cameras could not clearly identify weapons of mass destruction that we thought that they had our intellegence is a complete failure.

    However based on this information our administration sent our nations children into harms way on a hunch. A hunch that was not confirmed by ANY facts, only assumptions.

    Our administration has torn a nation apart (contrary to Bush’s non-nation building stance). They put a deck of cards out with 56 pictures on them and put their faces on the news daily as we captured or killed the supposed harborer’s of weapons of mass destruction.

    We chase the President of the Country (hussein was a natural born idiot though but so are many other leaders…bush for instance) into a hole and capture him on TV in a hole in a rural city.

    We kill the presidents children and drag them through the street, placing their faces across the news.

    We destroy all of the infrasturcture that has taken ages to build. Destroying some of the oldest cites in the world. (Iraq is the home of mesopotamia….cradle of civilzation…some even believe the garden of eden was there)

    Then we put the President of Iraq on trial for crimes that were not hardly as gross as all of the lives that the war in Iraq has taken. (I know that the US did not put him on trial, but get real…we really were through our cronies over there)

    Not only was he put on trial, but it took 5 judges getting suspended and countless jurrors getting suspended to finally get a guilty verdict. Hardly due process in my book.

    Furthermore…to put gas on the fire….a cameraphone video is released online of the hanging of the Hussein…

    Hussein was not a good person…but we have killed thousands of Iraqi citizens and done all the acts above because he had weapons of mass destruction….They were not there….

    We royally F..ed up and the rest of the world is seeing this…the rest of the world is viewing the err’s of our ways and not the path of righousness that we proclaim……

    I do not know what we need to do but putting more americans on the line for the stabilization of a county that does not want to be stable is outright silly.

    Lets face the facts…Bush got us into a mess….he guessed about weapons and was wrong….and it was a HUGE mistake…..Lets not make another mistake and get out of that country and find the real offender…

    By the way where is Bin Laden?

  3. Something tells me that with a different President (even possibly a Republican) our generals would all of a sudden be making very different decisions for themselves.

  4. Bull Moose says:

    Leaders need to be honest and explain in a sincere manner the stakes of Iraq.

    We may be at the point where the President lacks the credibility to lead that conversation. None the less, a serious national dialogue needs to occur based on facts.

  5. Carpe Forem says:

    Well Bull,

    That last entry actually sounds reasonable and I agree. However, it would have been nice to have this sincere and serious dialogue before we got in this mess.

  6. Bill Simon says:

    Bush should appoint Newt to a new “study group” since Newt has suddenly become Mr. “Golly-Gee-We’re-Fighting-The-Wrong-War” all of a sudden.

  7. John Konop says:

    Powell tried to talk Bush out of war

    Why do you think President Bush did not listen to Colin Powell?

    TOL-The former American secretary of state Colin Powell has revealed that he spent 2

  8. John Konop says:

    You cannot fix the problem unless we are honest about the problem. The truth is the CIA and military intelligence warned us not to go into Iraq due to the issue of the tribal fighting since 700 AD.

    Democracy is not sprinkle dust that can eliminate the years of hate and violence. Also in the places we have seen elections like Lebanon and Palestine it has been a mess. The key to Democracy is the ability to respect minority views.

    That is why our founding fathers designed us into a representative government. That can only work if parties are first willing to respect the rights of minorities.

    That is why the concept of forcing a strong federal government in Iraq will only lead to more unrest unless you have a strong man. And Sedum himself did not travel without a lot of security in parts of Iraq.

    That is why unless we recognize the areas of tribal difference and support local control than it will just be more of the same.

    We cannot force people to live like us. And we must change the bar in Iraq to containment.

    Finally our military being on Muslim soil is a problem via most experts. We can only get out if we bring in regional players. The problem is without recognizing the tribes bringing in regional players will create more problems due to sectarian issues.

    As Colin Powell and most experts warned before the war this is a mess that was not thought out by both parties when they voted for the war.

  9. Paul Shuford says:

    I have a problem with Colin Powell doing the “I’m not responsible! I tried to keep them from doing this!” dance right now. Colin Powell is the one who went before the UN and convinced them that it was a good idea that we go into Iraq. He’s just as responsible as anyone else in the Administration.

  10. John Konop says:

    I agree with you but what he said matches what the CIA and Military intelligence reports before the war. And all the lawmakers knew about the reports!

    I have a friend who served under Powell and he said that it was an soldiers honor to do what your superior tells you even if you disagree.

  11. Paul Shuford says:

    If he disagreed as strongly as he is claiming that he disagreed now, he should have resigned instead of being a party to instigating the war. I don’t buy the “I warned them!” crap.

  12. John Konop says:

    Brent Scowcroft former national security adviser to Presidents Gerald R. Ford and George H. W. Bush also helped with the containment strategy for the Middle East with Powell post the Beirut problems wrote this op-ed warning why not go into Iraq before the war.

    “Don’t Attack Saddam”
    By Brent Scowcroft
    Wall Street Journal
    August 15, 2002

    Our nation is presently engaged in a debate about whether to launch a war against Iraq. Leaks of various strategies for an attack on Iraq appear with regularity. The Bush administration vows regime change, but states that no decision has been made whether, much less when, to launch an invasion.He is unlikely to risk his investment in weapons of mass destruction, much less his country, by handing such weapons to terrorists who would use them for their own purposes and leave Baghdad as the return address. Threatening to use these weapons for blackmail — much less their actual use — would open him and his entire regime to a devastating response by the U.S. While Saddam is thoroughly evil, he is above all a power-hungry survivor….

    …..He is unlikely to risk his investment in weapons of mass destruction, much less his country, by handing such weapons to terrorists who would use them for their own purposes and leave Baghdad as the return address.

    Threatening to use these weapons for blackmail — much less their actual use — would open him and his entire regime to a devastating response by the U.S. While Saddam is thoroughly evil, he is above all a power-hungry survivor…..

    ….Saddam is a familiar dictatorial aggressor, with traditional goals for his aggression. There is little evidence to indicate that the United States itself is an object of his aggression. Rather, Saddam’s problem with the U.S. appears to be that we stand in the way of his ambitions. He seeks weapons of mass destruction not to arm terrorists, but to deter us from intervening to block his aggressive designs……

  13. Bill, to elaborate, there is a lot of talk that Bush “listens to the generals” or “lets the generals do their job” or whatever else. This is all fine and good, as it should be. The problem is that time and again the Bush presidency has been predisposed to one solution or another to a problem and his underlings then toil to present the facts in a manner that reinforces the initial decision of the higher ups.

    In other words, Bush says to his generals I’ll do whatever you guys say is necessary but I would prefer it to be “stay the course, things are improving with our current strategy”. I’m speculating that under a new president who actually goes to the military leaders and says “what do we do now” and doesn’t just want to hear “we stay the course” the generals may have some radically different ideas than what is going on now.

  14. GOPeach says:

    Newt is a day late and a dollar short.

    I like him – he is brilliant but…. he drug his feet.

    Look at what Mike Huckabee said last night at

  15. Tommy_a2b says:

    Bull, since we are talking about National issues important to GA. What the HEL7 happened to John McCain yesterday? Are you really going to let time go by without trying to spin the fact that the campaign is almost over? Come on man, it’s a marrathon, right.?

  16. IndyInjun says:

    The point is now moot but the reason for the Iraq war is found in the statement – “That man (Saddam) tried to kill my daddy.” Affirmation of personal revenge as a motive is found in Bush 43’s securing of Saddam’s pistol as a souvenir.

    All of the rationales for the war did fit one country perfectly, but it was PAKISTAN, who Bush proceeded to make an ally at an annual outlay of $1 to $2 billion.

    All of this is moot. We are there. We cannot afford to pull out due to our economic dependency on oil.

    HOWEVER, we have no stamina to PAY for the war via a 10 to 15% surtax. We borrow the money from China who, following the wisdom of Sun Tsu to defeat an adversary without battle, holds a gun to our head financially. Concurrently with our preoccupation with this misplaced war, the Chinese have secured long term resource and agricultural commodity contracts encompassing the African and South American continents. This was the greater harm that the American masses do not realize.

    We do not have the determination to MAN this war by implementing universal service that would send OUR sons and daughters into harm’s way. The volunteer Army is in its last throes due to endless redeployments, not to mention the injuries and death.

    It is a war that we cannot lose ,yet we are losing it. Even folks like this writer who know both of these things also know that MANNING the war and PAYING for it are politically impossible at this point.

    The Iraqis have the means to pay and man the needs of their country. We have spend $tens of billions to train them, but when they deploy only 10% show up.

    Winning is no longer possible. We are just getting real patriots killed at the hands of two executives who avoided war themselves.

    We have no option now but to get out, make preparations for $7 to $8 gasoline, and a likely financial collapse from the borrow and spend methods of the current administration – the most disastrous one in US history.

    We as citizens should deal harshly with the ones who brought this mess upon us and continue to back these disastrous policies.

    They did not learn the lessons of Vietnam. They avoided them. They landed us into another unwinnable war.

    Never get into a war that you are unwilling to man and finance down to the last resource of the nation TO WIN. That was the lesson.

    Bush told us to go forth and SPEND.

    Now we are SPENT.

  17. Bill Simon says:

    Indy Sez This: “We as citizens should deal harshly with the ones who brought this mess upon us and continue to back these disastrous policies.”

    I agree wholeheartedly. And, in celebration of Dubya’s reliance on the Bible so much for his guidance, I think stoning should be brought back into vogue. Not the smoking kind, but the hard, round, hefty throwing kind of stones.

  18. RJL says:

    In the 90 seconds I devoted to scanning this post and comments, future U.S. taxpayers incurred approximately $36,000 in debt to pay for Bush’s moronic disaster.

    h/t to all my alleged fiscally conservative Republican friends for their stewardship.

  19. rugby_fan says:

    Allow me to be Konopesque for a second…

    Bull Moose, you honestly need to give it up. McCain won’t be a candidate in ’08.

    How McCain Lost Control of his Campaign

    Every serious candidate for President has his share of difficult days. But few are as horrendous, especially this many months before primary season begins, as the one John McCain suffered through Tuesday. Just an hour before he had to go to the floor of the Senate to defend President Bush’s Iraq policy against a growing Republican rebellion, the onetime frontrunner for the GOP nomination accepted the resignation of his top two campaign staffers, manager Terry Nelson and chief strategist John Weaver. And almost as soon as he wrapped up his Iraq speech, he was besieged with rumors that another top adviser was bolting, and tried his best to refute growing speculation that his once promising campaign is all but finished.

  20. Bull Moose says:

    How a discussion on Iraq turns into a conversation about John McCain’s campaign is beyond me.

    This morning I read a great piece by Tony Blakely about Iraq. I would suggest you all google him and read it.

    We can debate the reasons we got into Iraq later. For now, we must accept that we are there, for good or bad, follow the advice of the military leaders on the ground, initiate broader diplomatic relationships across the region, and continue pressure on the Iraqi government to make progress.

    Leaving Iraq is a cheap political answer that only pleases the daily media cycle and weakens our country’s stability for generations to come.

    As for John McCain, yes, I continue to support him. I believe strongly that John McCain is the most experienced and capable candidate ready to be President.

    He is the right man for the times we face.

    You are not going to sway me from my opinion on that matter so don’t bother trying.

  21. John Konop says:

    I do not support McCain yet of all the front runners he has the best record on spending.

    And for anyone to believe Rudy will be tough on immigration after making New York a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants is a joke. Also Romney and Thompson have spotted records at best on the immigration.

    All of them are the same on the war so I do not get the kick back on McCain via front runner supporters.

  22. rugby_fan says:

    The McCain Mutiny

    As a plebe at the Naval Academy, John McCain was a scrappy boxer. His technique, as described in The Nightingale’s Song, was to rush into the middle of the ring and start throwing punches until the other guy went down. Today, he applied this approach to his presidential campaign, but this time, he may have knocked himself out.

    McCain has already retooled his campaign machine several times, which makes this reshuffle look less like a modification and more like a complete crackup. “The campaign is imploding,” said one McCain staffer, echoing a word used by others.

    The episode will also damage McCain in an unexpected way. It has given ammunition to all those who say McCain lacks a presidential temperament.

    I’m a gambling man, and, I will offer you a bet.

    $1,000 McCain is not the GOP nominee.

  23. RJL says:

    The great draft dodger, Chambliss, voted No late this morning on the cloture motion on the Webb amendment to Defense Appropriations that would have set minimum rest intervals for troops between deployments.

    Be sure to remember to remove your “Support Our Troops” stickers after work.

  24. Bull Moose says:

    Tommy – I’m not a gambler honestly, I don’t even play poker.

    I’m also not going to turn this into a McCain marathon.

  25. John Konop says:

    Bull Moose

    A few more questions.

    My question is which Generals?

    President Bush did not listen to the military and CIA when they warned him that invading Iraq would lead to out of control sectarian violence. Also if Sedum had WMD they did not think he would use them or sell them to terrorist.

    Then President Bush wanted to invade anyways. General Zinni, military experts and the CIA warned Bush that we needed 300,000 to 500,000 troops to have any chance. Also we must separate the Country and give local control. So what did Bush do? Bush gets rid of General Zinni and did the complete opposite.

    Next after Rumsfeld failed plan of doing Iraq on the cheap and blowing off military and CIA advice. Bush than waits to fire Rumsfeld to after the mid term election for what Bush admitted was for political purposes.

    Putting aside we have not met one time line for anything in Iraq the leaders of the Country plan on going on vacation for August rather than deal with the sectarian violence in their Country.

    And now President wants us to believe he will listen to the military. Does that mean Bush will listen until they do not do what he says?

Comments are closed.