WIMPY PELOSI NOW BACKS MURTHA: The House leader has been mealy-mouthed, but now says she's with the majority of House Dems in joining John Murtha in calling for immediate pullout of GIs from Iraq.

Also, it's revealed that U.S. has been paying Iraq papers to run pro-American stories. Surprise ! REUTERS Now Iraqis will find out about this dodge (e.g., on Internet) and then Iraqis won't believe ANY pro-Yank stories ! Those Bushies are SO clever !

It's now just a GOP war. Independents as well as Dems want us to pull out.
-------------
New Bush strategy is said to be 'oil-spot': clear a city of insurgents, hold it clear, then rebuild it so other Iraq cities envy them. (This is supposed to replace our futile 'whack-a-mole' attacks..but we're engaged in another attack right now!)

We can't clear ANY cities to STAY safely free; and the corruption (U.S. & Iraqi) and sabotage are such that rebuilding money is largely wasted.

Attacks on GIs are up from 45 a day earlier to 100 each day now.
Last March/April, 2 GIs were killed each day. In the last 2 months, an average of three GIs have been killed each day. [ FinTimes ]

 
FAR-SEEING ANALYSTS SEE BLEAK IRAQ FUTURE: [ ABC ]
These 2 Army analysts predicted (correctly!) before the invasion that
a) we would not be welcomed;
(b) we'd react in a way that heightened the resistance;
(c ) we shouldn't disband Saddam's army (but the Bushies did just that!)
--in sum, we'd win the war but lose the peace.

Their findings now:
--we can't sustain a troop presence past 2008;--we can't crush the insurgents before we have to start pulling out;

--NO MATTER HOW LONG WE STAY, we can't adequately train native militia to take over the fight with insurgents.

--we should forget the chatter about a 'democratic' Iraq; we should install a non-democratic but stable regime, to avoid a civil war. (That's the 'Saddam-lite' option--based on the truth that a country with hating ethnic groups--like Yugoslavia--can be held together only by a dictator.)

They point out that before '03, NO govt. agency said that we had a vital interest in Iraq's ending up democratic.

--We should announce a withdrawal timetable ONLY IF we've given up on establishing a stable Iraq govt. and we want to put the best face on our bugout. [Lyons: this is what will happen.]

 
BUDGET ELEPHANT IN OUR LIVING-ROOM: (ltr to USATODAY):
Your editorial (30Nov) blames our financial problems on Medicare and Social Security. You never mention the nearly half a trillion dollars that Congress just voted for the Pentagon next year.

You mention costs of the Iraq war; but they are chump-change. Only one dollar out of each seven Pentagon dollars goes for this war. The rest you cover with the vague phrase 'other politically potent groups'. (Presumably that would include one corporation that paid $2.5 million in outright bribes to the weeping Congressman, in return for $250,000,000 in Pentagon contracts.)

You mention Medicare getting a 'sky-high' amount of $346 billion, but you don't compare that amount to the $490,000 millions going next year to the Pentagon; that's over $1200 Millions each day.

What's really scandalous is that the Pentagon (whose bombers and missiles are useless against individual terrorists like the 19 men who attacked us on 9/11, or the four men who attacked London Transport)--the Pentagon gets over $10 for every $1 going to the Homeland Security Department.

We spend more for war than most other countries combined, and we get involved in frequent wars; but we haven't won a real war in 40 years. The Pentagon is NOT really a war-machine; it's a device for shovelling trillions to war-corporations.

 
GI CASUALTIES: [UnitedPress] 45 killed in last 15 days./
236 wounded in last 14 days.
In Oct, 30 were killed in 5 days.
from 2Oct to 16 Oct, 30 injured.

Worrisome: the improvement in insurgent road bombs.

 
FORGET SAYING "This is another Vietnam." A distinguished military historian says the Bush invasion was the stupidest military move IN TWO THOUSAND YEARS !

This guy is the only non-American author who is required reading for U.S. officers. FORWARD

He thinks our bugout will involve many GI casualties, but can't be avoided.
He also thinks we'll have to keep a force in the region, to protect, say JORDAN from the Zarqawistas spawned by the Bush invasion.

He says when it's all over, all the Bushie leaders should be tried for treason.

 
ETHNIC CLEANSING UNDERWAY: Hundreds of Sunnis have been killed (perhaps after torture) by masked men saying they represented our 'all/Iraq'--but mainly Shiite--militia. NYTIMES Our govt. leaders say these are really Sunni insurgents trying to stir up civil war--but witnesses say they were driving govt. cars.

This upsets Americans, who DREAM that (a) the Sunnis will vote in Dec., and (b) that this will weaken insurgency (!!)

But from Shia point-of-view: (a) many Sunnis collaborated with Saddam
in slaughtering Shia; and (b) many Sunnis are now collaborating with Sunni insurgents in slaughtering Shia today. They can hardly be blamed for lacking sympathy for Sunnis.

The only solution is to forget about a 'unified Iraq'; let a Kurdish ministate take over the North (including the oil-soaked areas around Kirkuk); and let a Shiite ministate control the regions where they form the majority. Unhappily, this will involve driving the Sunni minorities out of Shiite region, and Shiite minorities out of Sunni region.

U.S. should let Saddamite guerillas take over the middle (Sunni/Arab) region OPENLY--then encourage them to wipe out their erstwhile Zarqawist allies.

All this WILL happen after GIs are pulled out, perhaps to Kuwait--as Mr. Clark suggests in piece described below.

Then it will be up to Shiite militias and Kurdish militias to defend their regions from the Saddamites controlling the middle. This shouldn't be impossible: SunniArabs will be outnumbered 4 to 1.

 
USATODAY gives much space today to article by Richard A.Clark (long-time terrorist expert for 3 Presidents, who has turned against the Bushies) describing A WAY OUT OF IRAQ.

--We'd 'declare sort of a victory', reminding everyone that we toppled Saddam, removed any [non-existent] Saddamite threat to other nations, and gave Iraqis a CHANCE (that will very likely not be taken) to build a new nation respecting human rights.

--We'd start the pullout this coming January. This wouldn't make the insurgents more ferocious. They're not holding back now. It wouldn't introduce chaos; chaos is already there. Iraq would not be orderly if we stayed in till 2010. This would signal Iraqis that they must settle factional disputes (e.g., Shiite vs. Sunni) by compromise. [Bloody likely!]

--We would NOT tie our bugout to the competence of our 'all/Iraq' mercenaries 'who often seem resistant to training.' We'd pull out all troops sometime in 2007.

--We'd keep a 'robust' Army & Airforce in Kuwait, so we could rush back in (to prevent conventional invasion of Iraq).
[Lyons: one problem--polls show that ordinary Kuwaitis HATE Americans strongly, though their govt. loves us. When GIs were stationed there before the invasion, govt.had to drive out their own people from the region where GIs were stationed. GIs might be attacked there; however, supply lines from ships would be shortened; less danger from road-bombs.]

Our forces in Kuwait could not prevent infiltration of foreign fighters into Iraq (e.g., from Iran). But Americans would forget about what's going on in Iraq once GI casualty-rate is cut down.

 
"U.S.EMPIRE WON'T WORK !" says FinTimes writer.
--He says 'overwhelming majority' of U.S. 'establishment' dream of this empire. [ !! ]

--However, U.S. can't raise enough soldiers to man an empire. (Of course, when Pentagon produces enough robot-infantrymen...)

--Also, 'decadent' U.S. can't raise enough taxes to fund an empire. The wealthy have seized the state, so they don't have to pay much in taxes. The middle-class have been 'bought off'; this cuts tax revenue even further.
[rest of article is restricted to FT subscribers.]

[Lyons addition] Our leaders may be dreaming of controlling the world by airpower, using tactical 'nukes'. But that threat has already motivated more and more countries to develop '2d-strike capacity' so they can tell us "You can destroy our cities, but we can make you regret it !"

Our homeland is incredibly VULNERABLE to many, many kinds of attack. See NYTIMES article describing Bushies' unwillingness to invest in system of inspection of 25,000 huge ship-containers entering our ports each DAY-- each of which could contain nuke-materials for a chain-reaction bomb or at least for a 'dirty-bomb' that doesn't need chain-reaction to render, say, Chicago loop uninhabitable for months or years.

In general, see hair-raising NYTIMES series "AN INSECURE NATION".

Germ-war is the cheapest '2d-strike' weapon. Legendary'1918 flu' had no human allies; new pandemics MIGHT ! We can't develop vaccines until some time after the new germs show up--so we'll have to rely on forced quarantine, just like any primitive country.

Quarantine camps will be death-camps; families will hide their sick, so the pandemic will spread. Moreover, we have a lousy public-health system for the poor; terrorist martyrs could spread germs among our poor; diseases wouldn't be diagnosed until they spread to middle-class. We already face an urgent shortage of nurses; Bushies are doing nothing to set up nurse-training programs.

We used to feel impervious, like Superman; but now we notice more and more kryptonite lieing around. We'd better pull in our imperial horns.

 
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF WE BUGOUT? Pamela Hess, for UnitedPress (29n), lists all the right questions about the results--for Iraq and for U.S.--of a bugout (whole or partial) or a 'stay-the-course' policy. (She leans a little toward the hawk position--but her list of the questions is pretty perceptive.)
Then she says that these questions can't really be answered,right now. We just don't know what will happen if we follow each alternative course.

I have previously made the point that, just as the BURDEN OF PROOF is on those defending the START of a war, so is it also on those defending the CONTINUATION of a war. Since it's admitted that the defenders of continuation cannot show definitely that it will prevent clearly worse evils than would be caused by the extension of our involvement in this slaughter--the continuation cannot be justified. Q.E.D.

 
CUT TROOPS IN IRAQ, BOOST BOMBING? That's the plan the Bushies seem to have now. GUARDIAN

Never mind that it is the unprecise 'precision-bombing' that already is enraging survivors of bomb-victims, and recruiting them as terrorists.

U.S.commanders are horrified. Apparently the bombs will be directed by Iraqis on the ground. These directors may be people trying to destroy their own enemies; they may be extorting gangsters: "Pay up or we'll call in the dumb U.S. bombers !" They may be insurgents who have infiltrated into our militias, and will direct bombs to INSURGENTS' ENEMIES !

It was probably inevitable that when Bushies realized they have to pull out troops, they would dream that they could replace them with bombers.
Very shortly, most Iraqis (not just 45% as now) will rejoice at attacks on remaining GIs.
-------------
By the way, this new plan shows that Bushies know that our pathetic militia cannot stand against the insurgents.

Probably what Bush would LIKE to do is to drop a nuke on Iraq, and wipe his blunders off the map.

 
To read about the old & new slanders against the Irish, click on
SLANDERS

 
WONDER WHERE THOSE GM JOBS WENT? 450 went to India.
INDIA TIMES

U.S. workers are 'not worth their keep'. They can't compete with well-trained, low-pay workers in the 3d world. They'd better learn how to SPEND LESS. And the first step in that is to cut down on the NUMBER OF CHILDREN PRODUCED.

People who wish workers well should help make sure they know about the magic PLAN B pill, 'emergency contraception.'

 
SUPER-POWER? C'MON !
Spain is going to sell planes to Venezuela, and Russia's selling 100,000 Kalashnikov rifles to Chavez. Bushies object to these sales, but they can't stop them. (They're defensive weapons, just in case Bushies try to invade Venzuela.) GUARDIAN

 
'SNATCHING DEFEAT OUT OF THE JAWS OF UNCERTAINTY' is what A.Cordesman warns against, in opposing a 'premature' withdrawal from Iraq. NYTIMES
We have all heard of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Cordesman is more honest than this.

He is saying that if we pull out, we will have failed in Iraq. True enough.
But, he says, if we stay in, who knows?
-------------------
Suppose a person said, "OK, I won't kill this guy--IF you SHOW ME WHY I SHOULDN'T."That would not be acceptable. He has the 'burden of proof' to show why his homicide would be justified.

All the more, then, defenders of starting a war (vs. nation that has not attacked us) should have shown why this would be (a) last-resort necessary, and (b) would WORK to prevent greater evils than this war, with its predictable side-effects, would constitute.

Bushes made no serious attempt (just lies) to show this, to justify their 'preemptive war'.We should assume then, that they were stupid and wicked.
--------------
Now, sobered hawks say, "Granted, starting the war was foolish. But we can't pull out now."But suppose our killer said, "Granted, I killed 5 people without justification. And I'll go ahead and kill more, UNLESS YOU CAN SHOW WHY I SHOULDN'T keep on killing!"

That won't do. Even more so, then, defenders of EXTENDING this fiasco-war must SHOW, not just assert, that this EXTENSION will WORK to prevent more evils than it constitutes. "If we stay in, who knows what will happen?"--this won't do.

We should assume that extending the war now would be as foolish and wicked as was starting the war.

 
HYPOCRITES & MONUMENTS:
That stubborn hawk Chas. Krauthammer [Wash.Post,28N] tells us that American love of liberty is attested by all the statues we erect to liberators. But long ago Jesus denounced the Pharisees as hypocrites who honored with tombs and inscriptions the prophets whom their fathers slaughtered; these hypocrites were also ready to slaughter prophets. (Mt23/29)

Honoring liberators who are safely dead is no true indicator of a society's love of liberty. It's shocking how many Americans today accept the Bush-team's attacks on liberty. (They excuse these by chattering about HomelandSecurity. But they show no real concern for HomelandSecurity!)

 
WHO'S LYING?
Jay Ambrose(rMTNnews,27N) quivers with indignation about how Democrats are lying that the Bush-team lied about danger from Saddam to get us into war.

Wait a minute. There's no doubt that the Bush-team made claims that turned out not to be true. But of course it's hard to prove that they knew these statements were false; we can't probe their minds.

Analogously, people like Ambrose can't read Democrats' minds. Perhaps they honestly believe (no matter how erroneously) that the Bush people did lie through their teeth. So Democrats can't be called liars now.
----------------
Ambrose of course says that Democratic lawmakers had access to the 'same intelligence' that the WhiteHouse had--but it's obvious that the Congressmen got the intelligence after it had been filtered through the WhiteHouse, stripped, for instance, of any doubts expressed by the CIA,etc.(The Democrat mistake was to trust the WhiteHouse.)

One is reminded of the rural saying that you can buy oats cheaper which have passed through the horse.
---------------------
Anyway, the Bush-team should have known they didn't have strong enough evidence of Saddam's danger to other nations--not evidence strong enough to justify starting a war against a nation that had not attacked us.

An incompetent administration in this situation is more frightening than a cynically deceptive one.

 
A story in DenverPOST (27N) says that al-Sadr, the ferocious Shiite cleric, keeps his Mahdi army attacking, all the time he's demonstrating big political clout in the upcoming election.

This illustrates the folly of thinking that the Sunni insurgency will be weakened by their new tactic of encouraging,not forbidding Sunnis to vote.They can vote and run for office and serve in the assembly, all the while they keep attacking GIs and Iraqis they disagree with.
After all, the IRA did just that for decades in Ulster: they sat in the British parliament and bombed British targets at the same time.

Even if all Sunnis voted, they'd be outvoted by 4 to 1 by Shiites and Kurds. You can bet the insurgents realize they have nothing to gain from majoritarian democracy.

 
REMEMBER KEVORKIAN? Dr. K. was 'assisting suicides'. They tried to convict him, but juries balked. However, then he was approached by someone with LouGehrig's disease, totally paralyzed. (They choke on their own saliva.) There was never any doubt that this fellow asked K. to kill him.

Dr. K. injected this guy, so he was charged (& convicted!) of murder, and has been imprisoned (in his 70s) for years in Michigan.Now he's perhaps dieing himself, but the governor refuses to release him (afraid, perhaps, of fundamentalist voters--Catholic & Protestant.) In fact she has refused 3 requests for early pardon.YahooNews

These vindictive church-goers, lacking absolutely any pity or mercy,remind one of the witch-burning churchgoers in early New England.

Kevorkian, in a few years, will be remembered as a martyr for good sense and compassion; his persecutors will be seen as deserving divine retribution.

 
TIRED OLD HAWK: [ltr to RmtnNews]
V.H.Davis (26Nov--link not available) tells us again that Democrats also said that Saddam was cooperating with alQaeda. Maybe so--but they weren't sure enough to invade ! (Sane leaders don't invade other countries unless they have good reason to feel sure the invasion is 'last-resort' necessary and also that it will work to prevent a worse evil than the slaughter involved in the invasion.)


The Democrats might have thought, sensibly, that (a) terrorists are individuals scattered all over the globe, not needing 'state support' to flourish, so (b) invading Afghanistan and Iraq would not work to minimize terrorism. (In fact terrorist attacks have increased markedly around the world since we invaded. Our invasion has enraged Muslims all over the world enough to give new support to terrorists.)

"When in doubt about the consequences, don't start a war." This seems a reasonable maxim--but not one ever considered by Bush and his henchmen.

Ancient history? No. We're asked to continue this fiasco, knowing that it will continue to be mismanaged by the same team of ruthless incompetents who stumbled into this war.

 
SUNNIS VOTING AND BOMBING:
US media keep mentioning the hope that new Sunni interest in voting (in the election 3 weeks from now) will 'weaken the insurgency'.

So t his bears repeating:
--If all Sunnis voted,they'd still be outvoted 4 to 1 by Shiites & Kurds. It's said they might get 50 seats in the new assembly, out of 275. REUTERS
Again, they have nothing to gain from majoritarian democracy.

--Insurgent sympathizers might vote, run for office, even sit in the assembly--and go right on bombing. That's what IRA did for decades in Ulster.

Why do Sunni 'leaders' want a heavy vote? Because if they personally get elected, they'll have a steady salary for 4 years as representatives. (They might get killed, also--but the pay might be worth the risk.)

Nothing presently indicates that the insurgency will be weakened.
The only hope (a grim one) is this: Saddamite generals now run one branch of insurgency; US might hand over Sunni/Arab region to them openly, hoping they'd then wipe out their erstwhile Zarqawista allies.

But the generals would inherit an region with sand, not oil. The only guarantee they could get of future share in oil money is the Shiites/Kurds ceding them some oil-lands. This would require amendments in the constitution, which could be vetoed by a 2/3 vote in only 3 provinces.
Surely such a radical change WOULD be vetoed--especially since insurgents have been slaughtering Shiites !

It looks as if Saddamites will take over the middle region, and go right on attacking Shiites and Kurds, willing to fight to the death. That they will; when the two other groups turn on them, they'll be outnumbered in the civil war by 4 to 1 !

There's nothing US troops can do to prevent this civil war. If we keep them there, they'll be caught in the middle. BRING'EMHOME !

 
Recently the House GOP flummoxed the Dems by advancing a motion to pull our troops out of Iraq right now. Dems joined GOP reps. in defeating the motion. Only 3 dems voted 'yes'. (i.e, no to continuing the war):
Cynthia McKinney/Jose Serrano/Robt. Wexler. (May their names be remembered as heroes.)

The rest of the DemReprs. were not just unprincipled, but dumb. Suppose most Dems had voted to pull out now. The motion would have been voted down; anyway, Bush wouldn't do it, so Dems would not be blamed for some disaster actually resulting from pulling out. But the war would clearly be marked, as it is, as a GOP project.

The only reason the Dems are a lesser evil is because the GOPS are such a very great evil.

 
BUGGING OUT WOULD BE COWARDLY & IMMORAL, says LondonOBSERVER--after admitting that the war up till now has been incredibly bungled by THE SAME TEAM that would mismanage any extension of US/Brit involvement !

The 'chicken hawks' (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Blair) were cowardly to lie us into war when they themselves managed to shirk combat in their youths.

As for morality, Pope JPII's envoy to Bush put it very clearly before the invasion: This invasion would be 'unjust, illegal, and disastrous'.
If our governments didn't care about the moral authority of the Vatican, they should have heeded that last, prescient point: 'disastrous'. The Vatican is the most worldly-wise agency in the world, with representatives in every nation (its clergy) knowledgeable about its language and culture. But these ignorant pups ignored this wise advice.

The tipping point has now been reached (long ago inBritain) even in the American heartland. Luckily, this journalistic chatter will be ignored.
-------------
MORALISTIC HAWKS: They now admit it was immoral and foolish of us to invade--but they say it would be immoral to just pull out now, leaving Iraq 'even worse off'. But if we spend 3 more years enraging Iraqis (who want us OUT!) , recruiting and training new terrorists, and getting GIs killed, maimed or wounded--after 3 years, who is to say that Iraqis won't THEN be 'worse off'?

To justify continuing the war even by one week, hawks must SHOW (not just speculate) a) that Iraq would be 'worse off' if we leave now, and (b) that IF we stay for a few years--(all that Americans would ever tolerate) Iraq would NOT then be 'worse off'.

Hawks are not even trying to shoulder this burden of proof. So we must assume that 'staying on' is NOT morally indicated.

Luckily GOP leaders are worried enough about the '06 elections that they're pressuring dimwit Bush to pull out early in '06. Morality has little to do with it.

 
THE TIPPING POINT: Reason for Thanksgiving: Everyone's talking about 'Pullout'--even hawkish RmtnNews ran a big visible piece today saying we have to get out !

The only ones who haven't got it yet--Bush & Cheney still say that 'pullout' talk would 'embolden the insurgents'. It looks like the Pentagon (and Rice!)are defying them.

Iraq will continue in bloody chaos for some time. But we can be thankful that in a few months our ruthless, goofy generals won't be adding as much to their (and our) suffering.
----------------
Dozens of Iraqi casualties today--with 4 GIs killed in last 24 hours, and several wounded. REUTERS

 
AL JAZEERA RULES !
Luckily, Brits don't cooperate with 'classified' labels or censorship any better than Americans do.

Someone leaked to a Brit newspaper ( The Daily Mirror )the story that Bush proposed to Blair that he should BOMB alJazeera TV/radio station in a friendly country, Qatar ! !

Luckily, Blair, in a rare display of courage, talked him out of it.And luckily this leaked story will give AL JAZEERA station much free publicity all over the world. (American media hesitate to name the station: AL JAZEERA. Remember that name..they now have an English-language outlet.)

When the story leaked out, the Blairites naturally said the exchange was humorous--but the newspaper said the exchange was deadly serious.Then the Brit govt. announced that anyone who leaked the details of the conversation would be prosecuted under the 'Official Secrets' Act. Sounds pretty serious.

Talk about locking the barn-door after the horse is gone' ! OR are the details so awful that it would be even worse to leak them ? !

For instance, did Bush say that God ordered him to bomb the station ?
-------------
A WashingtonPost writer aptly calls this story a JOURNALISTIC BOMB, says that someone in Britain IS being prosecuted for SOME leak--
and he reminds us that under Bush's daddy, we DID 'accidentally' bomb AL JAZEERA ! (And there have been stories about our 'accidentally' bombing journalists in THIS war who refused to be 'embedded' with our troops--ie., castrated.)
REUTERS quotes reports that AlJazeera has TWICE been bombed 'accidentally'.

This story,and these reminders, should boost AlJazeera's worldwide audience tremendously ! One reporter died in bombings; but the agency should be tremendously grateful to Bush. Once again, he has greatly helped his enemies.

 
65% DISAPPROVE OF BUSH--even more of Cheney.

WAR is by far the most important issue.

Fewer than 1 in 3 trust info offered by Bushies.

HarrisInteractivePoll, cited by WallStreetJournal

Congressional leaders unpopular; Dems &GOPs equally unpopular.

 
U.S.TROOPS TO BE CUT BELOW 100K: says ChinaNews
One brigade will be kept in Kuwait, just in case...

Problems: Ordinary Kuwaitis HATE Americans. Govt. may have to clear natives out of a whole region where GIs are stationed--as they did in '03.

Suppose U.S. casualties RISE after the withdrawal? a guarantee that this won't happen can be arranged only by withdrawing remainder of troops to some place near a safe border, so supply caravans are not devastated by road bombs.

Then it will be obvious that Bushies have given up the fight vs. the insurgents. Will Americans tolerate,say, 80,000 GIs remaining in some danger (and great discomfort) when we're not even pretending to fight the guerillas?

GIs concentrated in one 'safe' place could be subjected to ANTHRAX shells or POISON GAS shells--this gas kills on touching skin; no gasmasks help; and GIs won't wear permanently those awful 'space-suits' in Iraq heat.
Just recently the insurgents managed to fire a mortar within range of our ambassador & top general !
-------
BRITS MUST STAY ON IN IRAQ FOR DECADES, says a Brit think-tank--and of course that means our troops must also stay on, suffering deaths and maimings for decades--because U.S. simply can't afford to lose control over Iraq oil. In other words, our native militia will NOT succeed in controlling Iraq for us ! FinTimes

 
COLOSSAL SCOOP? LondonTIMES says U.S. commanders in Iraq plan a big troop-withdrawal..starting next month after Iraq elections !The object is to get the numbers down below the 'magic number'of 100,000.

These generals have said publicly that our troops were doing much harm, by enraging Iraqis and recruiting more terrrorists.

Bush says we're going to stay the course--but of course,he says, we'll go by the judgment of the generals on the ground.

Very likely, these generals have been ordered to insist on our 'staying the course'. Their now going public on their withdrawal scheme may mean that they are defying Rumsfeld--the plan has now been submitted to him; how will he dare veto it ?

Their going public also means they're warning our puppets in Iraq to get ready to shift for themselves. The Kurds and the Shiites will likely use their own militias to defend their territories. (There will be an agonizing 'ethnic cleansing' driving all the Sunnis out of the Shiite region, and all the
Shiites from the Sunni/Arab region. Also, the Sunni/Arabs will be driven away by the Kurds from the oil-soaked Kirkuk region, away from the pipelines that some Sunnis have been sabotaging. This middle region will be a no-man's land, until the Saddamite generals take over.)

Will GI casualties drop? Only if our generals quit pretending to counter the guerillas, and pull remaining troops back to some safe border (so supply convoys would not be subject to the devastating road bombs.)

But then why not pull out MOST GIs ? (leaving just enough to serve as a 'tripwire' to deter foreign invasion?) What's so magic about 'less than 100,000' ? Five digits instead of Six ? ! The whole world, including Americans--we hope--will see that keeping in , say, 80,000 will be just to save Bush's face. And this face is already scarred beyond repair.

Martha Raditz, on ABC/News, said the Pentagon talk is of pulling 50,000 troops.
----------------
The inter-sectarian Iraqis meeting in Cairo, at the last minute, have come to some agreement. Most important: tens of thousands of Sunni detainees (not convicted of any crime!) will be released.

Also, GIs will be asked to withdraw--not immediately, but gradually.
[ NewZealandTV] How gradually? Whether Bush likes it or not, Sunni & Shiite leaders agree they want a TIMETABLE for withdrawal.
--------
Rummy says we won't pull out 'right away'--certainly NOT BEFORE ELECTION NEXT MONTH ! NYTIMES And of course he chatters on about how well our training is going of Iraqi troops--never mind that our general just said that only 700 of them are ready to face the insurgents without US backing !

So it looks like we'll pretend the 'all/Iraq'army is ready, and then bug out and Bushies will hope Americans won't notice the disaster that follows.
Let's all hope they don't arrange some awful distraction.
-----------------
Thirty-four Thousand readers of NEWSWEEK online call for pullout NOW !( 72% to 22%). But of course they're not typical: they're literate and informed.
==========
Click on COMMENT below for an interesting dialogue.

 
HAS HEART TROUBLE AFFECTED HIS BRAIN?
Cheney says that Saddam had the burden of proof to show he DIDN'T have WMDs; we didn't have to prove he did, to justify our invasion.
[ SanDiegoUnion ]

Analogously, Hitler could have said that Poland didn't PROVE it was NOT preparing to attack the mighty German Wehrmacht; so he had every right to launch his 'pre-emptive' invasion.

 
HAWKS GETTING LIMP, not just lame. Joe Klein in TIMEmag (28Nov) lays out all the prohibitive money costs of staying on in Iraq (mainly, the destruction of our overstretched army.)

He makes the interesting point that Rep.Murtha is no dove; he wants to bugout of Iraq in order to save money to buy weapons for our future war with China! "We bought only 4 or 5 ships this year !"(Rumsfeld is with him there.)

[Actually, the Pentagon is so flush with money that the Iraq war has only dented its purse. The $200,000 millions which over 2 yrs of the war has cost us so far is less than six months of Pentagon $. Chump change. But the war corporations want ALL the money !]

Then Klein feels he must sound hawkish. So he asks a) if our bugout would 'destabilize' the MiddleEast. [Actually, the ME is now unstable, and would get further destabilized whenever we left, even after tens of thousands more GI casualties and--more important--more money taken from war with China!]

Klein also asks (b) will our withdrawal increase or decrease the chance of another terrorist attack at home? There's no doubt that our bombings and atrocities in Iraq have recruited many new America-haters around the world--so staying in (committing more atrocities) MIGHT increase our danger at home--but not by much. Also the longer we stay, the more chance new terrorists have to get trained in guerilla war vs. a clumsy First-World army.

The burden of proof is on anyone defending the continuation of this slaughter of GIs even by one more week. That burden of PROOF (vs. imagined scenarios) the hawks aren't even trying to shoulder.

 
WAR-MONGERS DYING TO ATTACK IRAN,in London & D.C.
But a Brit terrorism specialist recommends that we think over the likely outcome of the war.

70 million people living in area 4 times as big as Iraq. (They can easily hide their nuke facilities from 'surgical strikes'.) Standing army of 510,000; each year, EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND Iranian youths turn 17, programmed as good Shia to seek martyrdom. Earlier Iranians fought off Saddam, who was backed by U.S.--at a cost of one million total dead on both sides.

They're Persians,not Arabs, descendents of the ancient Persian empire.
LondonTimes

They could cut off their own oil (reserves 2d largest in OPEC). They could mine Strait of Hormuz to cut off oil from other countries. And of course they could sabotage oil exports from Iraq ! Look for oil on the world market over $100 per barrel.

They could flood into Iraq, forming another front vs. U.S. GIs, who would pay horribly for Bushie bellicosity. They also have great influence over a large population of Afghans, able to recruit more of them to kill GIs.

Sensible U.S.leaders would think twice..but Bushies often don't even think once. So who knows what'll happen?

 
LARGEST US JEWISH GROUP OPPOSES IRAQ WAR:
Union for Reform Judaism, at biennial mtg, overwhelmingly voted to condemn the Iraq war. JTA

Undoubtedly many individual US Jews (usually Democrats and antiwar) have condemned this war..but media have not reported many BIG-GROUP resolutions like this.

We'd also like to hear more FATWAS from world's Sunni Muslim leaders condemning barbaric slaughter of civilians by guerillas in Iraq.

 
INTERNATL AGENCY CONDEMNS BUSHIE BLUNDERS, but objects to our quick withdrawal. All that's needed is INTELLIGENT management of Iraq politics now by the SAME TEAM OF IGNORANT BUSHIE INCOMPETENTS AS BUNGLED THE PREVIOUS OPERATIONS ! FinTimes

 
BOSSES COMPLAIN OF SHORTAGES OF SKILLED WORKERS:
FinTimes
U.S. youth either can't or won't take difficult training.

One possible explanation: U.S. corporations have had to make Americans childish and stupid in order to get them to consume and borrow hysterically, to move the surplus of goods.

Unfortunately, childish stupidity extends beyond consuming. Childish parents let their kids have TVs in their bedrooms ! By the time they're 'graduated' from high-school, many are ineducable.

54% of Americans think that God made the world and mankind in 6 days.
"They think Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church."

 
ON THE ONE HAND, THE MORTARS MISSED OUR AMBASSADOR & OUR TOP GENERAL...on the other hand, the guerillas somehow managed to get within Mortar range!

180 Iraqis killed in the last few days. REUTERS

 
BUSH ECON.PERFORMANCE: The ever-smaller number of these defenders constantly cite our small percentage of new applicants for unemployment..but this figure neglects those who, from despair, have simply quit applying for jobs. They have used up their unemployment benefits.

One in five unemployed have been looking for work for over 6 months, an unheralded number. [USATODAY,22NOV] And 4 million are working (unwillingly) only part-time.

------------------------
Wages are not keeping up with price-rises. Let's face it: U.S. workers are NOT WORTH THEIR KEEP; i.e., they can't compete with robots and cheap,skilled workers overseas.

Our workers had better learn (like their Great-Depression ancestors) to spend a lot less--and the biggest economy is to beware of having children !

Luckily the 'emergency contraception' pill can help here--if ordinary people know about it.

 
A ltr to USATODAY (22Nov) gives Bush credit for our not (yet) having been attacked again. Polls show most Americans now realize this is just luck--especially given the shameless Bushie neglect of Homeland Defense ! That would be like a writer last year praising the water-defenses of NewOrleans, because they hadn't failed in hurricanes yet !

This writer also says we must give Bush credit for being consistent.
One is reminded of the doomed admiral mentioned in a movie:
"The weakness of his intellect was matched only by the firmness of his will."

 
from DavidLetterman:
--Jeb Bush wants to be president. You can't blame him--right now the Bush name is just magic !

--Jeb as President--that's a good idea. Someone will have to pardon his brother.

--Pres. Bush is on a tour of Asia. He's visiting American jobs.

 
WHITE PHOSPORUS: A CHEMICAL WEAPON?
Bushies now say it wasn't illegal (from treaties we signed) to caramelize Fallujah civilians alive with White Phosphorus, because it was a mere 'incendiary' weapon.

Who cares? It is a subhuman weapon, used (like depleted uranium, napalm, and cluster-bombs) by subhuman commanders.
But just for the record, a recently declassified Pentagon document shows that we once accused Saddam of using White Phosphorus, a CHEMICAL weapon ! [cited by THINK/PROGRESS]

Bushies are as incompetent at lying as they are at waging war.

 
TO PAUL CAMPOS: You say (RMN22Nov) that people objecting early on to our invasion were claiming 'an omniscience noone has'. Nonsense; as a lawyer you ought to understand the concept of 'burden of proof' in situations of uncertainty.

A person proposing to kill one individual has the burden of proof to show this homicide will be justified. He can't say, "Sure, I'll refrain from killing him--if you show me why I should."

A fortiori, a government, to justify its proposed invasion, must SHOW, with very high objective antecedent PROBABILITY--not just conceivable POSSIBIITY, (a) that the invasion is necessary (as a last resort) to prevent some evil clearly greater than the war itself (with all its unhappy side-effects) will constitute;
--and (b) that the invasion will very likely work to prevent that evil.
Bushies never tried to make this kind of rational defense of their invasion.

Bushies said theywere fighting 'evil', but they never tried to show that this invasion would make the slightest dent in evil, or even in worldwide 'Islamo-fascism', or in the threats to our Homeland.
(They counted on Americans being gullible enough to bow to the slogan "the best defense is an offense." Someone has pointed out that we are now out hunting foxes overseas, leaving ajar the door to our henhouse ! )

Needless to say, Bushies never showed that the invasion was necessary because Saddam had WMDs. Others may have suspected that he did (even I thought he had enough poison gas to punish invaders--a reason NOT to invade. That's not believing he had enough WMDs to threaten other countries.) But these people (e.g., Clinton) didn't feel sure enough about the points above to invade. Weren't they sensible?

Bushies didn't even really try to show this. Cheney just said again, absurdly, that Saddam had the burden of proof to show he DIDN'T have WMDs.
Bushies tried to shoulder their burden of proof with blatant lies.

War-critics don't have to pretend to omniscience. They need only note that the hawks have NOT offered reliable evidence to justify starting--or continuing-- this war. (Every added day of slaughter needs separate justification.)
-----------------
I hope you advanced these silly criticisms of early war opponents just to look more objective when you join the ever-louder calls for us to bugout.

 
BROOKS ISN'T VERY THOUGHTFUL: [ltr to RmtnNews]

David Brooks, in his pose as 'thoughtful hawk' (22NOV) admits that our invasion was foolish (and therefore wicked, though he doesn't say this)--but he says we can't pull out now, because we are 'the only authority that prevents the country from imploding'.

We have NO authority in Iraq. 82% of Iraqis object to our presence; 12 million are so angry they approve of slaughtering our GIs. Both Shiites and Sunnis at the Cairo conference called for our withdrawal TIMETABLE.

Whether we stay or not, Iraq will slide either to civil war--or to splitting into 3 mini-states, with painful 'ethnic cleansing' removing minorities from majority regions. If we stay, our GIs might get caught between both sides of the civil war.

Brooks admits that 'some' U.S. military say this war is unwinnable--but 64% of military officers believe we can prevail. He doesn't say that it is the field generals on the spot who say we can't win; perhaps it is the officers who were never in Iraq who say we can. Perhaps the officers in Iraq realize that any extension of the war will be mismanaged by the same incompetent 'chicken-hawks' like Rumsfeld, who never saw war first-hand.

Brooks' 'thoughtful' pose is wearing pretty thin.

 
SHIITE HONCHO PREDICTS A SEPARATE, AUTONOMOUS REGION COMPOSED OF PRESENT SHIITE PROVINCES. ABCNews

This is what Sunnis most fear: a Kurdish ministate to their North, and a Shiite ministate to their South (with Iran as an ally "Two bodies with one soul"). Practically all the oil-lands will belong to one or the other, with the Sunni/Arabs owning only desert.

Under present constitutional rules, this is perfectly legal. If any change-amendments were proposed, they could be vetoed by 2/3 voting in any 3 provinces. This the Shiites/Kurds could manage easily.

The Sunni/Arabs have nothing to gain under this constitution. The Saddamite guerilla-leaders might well decide to fight to the death.
(Eventually, outnumbered 4 to 1, they might be massacred.)

 
MURTHA VS. USATODAY : [ltr to editor]:
It's interesting to contrast the view of Rep.John Murtha on the war with that of your writers (21Nov). To defend his proposal for immediate withdrawal,Murtha cites specific facts about our clear failure: GI deaths soaring from one to four a day; insurgent attacks soaring from 150 to 700 each week; 12 million Iraqis (not just Sunnis) approving of the slaughter of GIs.

Your editorial was curiously vague: if we leave now, you say, civil war might turn from low grade to full-scale (which it will likely do anyway; there's little our troops can do to start this slide. Only partition and ethnic cleansing will suffice.);

--Part of the country might become a terrorist haven (it is already ! );

--and binLaden types might gloat about our soldiers being a 'paper tiger'.

We pulled out of Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, and Lebanon NOT because we're paper tigers, but because our government foolishly got us entangled in 'no-win' conflicts involving no real interest of ours. It was the barging in that was disgraceful, not the bugging out.

One factor you don't mention: any extension of the war will be mismanaged by exactly the same team of incompetents as stumbled into the war.

We must not wait till it is obvious even to your writers that our project is hopeless; we should pull back now; we must, sadly, let the Iraqis fight it out themselves.

 
'Announcing a pullout would just EMBOLDEN the insurgents' says Bush.
As if they're not maximally bold now. They're not attacking in batallion strength--but they don't need to. Hundreds of Iraqis killed in the last few days, and ninety GIs killed since the recent 'landmark' of 2000 killed.

 
WHEN DO IRAQIS WANT US TO LEAVE? BostonGlobe did an unscientific sampling of Iraqi opinion. Unsurprisingly, most Sunnis want us out right now; but sampled Shias (whom we've put into power) want a delayed pull out.

Experts say that no army can defeat guerillas who are backed by 20% of the population. The staggering, more thorough poll by London Telegraph says that 45% of all Iraqis approve of attacks on our GIs (about 12 million, obviously including many non-Sunnis--because Sunnis make up only 20% of Iraqi population .)

Suppose we stay 'on duty' for another two years. Iraq is already moving to covert civil war; it will then explode into open war. Nothing will have been accomplished, but tens of thousands more GIs will be killed, or come back legless,armless,faceless,blinded,brain-damaged or shell-shocked.

(More GI casualties happened after Richard Nixon 'continued' the Viet war than before he came in.)

Perhaps we shouldn't care what a small sample of Shiites say they want.
-----------
It's interesting that almost no mainstream U.S. media have taken note of this astonishing Iraqi poll. (only Chi. Tribune columnist/& NYTIMES columnist Kristov, but only for paying readers.) Check this on Google, searching for "secret poll" + Iraq + Telegraph.

Rep. Murtha mentioned it on JimLehrer'sNewsHour, and many, many websites have noted it..thank God we don't have to depend just on U.S. media for information.

 
MORE FROM HAWKS:
The London OBSERVER staff admit (a) that they favored the 'intervention' in Iraq (note the euphemism for a bloody, unjust invasion--needless, pointless, and winless ! )
--and (b) they admit that this 'project' has in many ways, and to an incredible degree, turned sour.

But then the paper says we mustn't 'cut and run', 'betraying Iraq'.
(This even though only 1 in 100 Iraqis say we're making them more secure; 82% object strongly to our presence; and about 12 million are so angry that they support the slaughter of our soldiers!) They know better in London than do the natives, what's good for Iraqis !

This editorial warns that our bugout would intensify Iraq violence, and would suck in neighboring nations into the conflict. (We could station a small 'trip-wire' contingent of GIs in friendly Kurdland to deter any conventional invasion.)

One could have hoped for less folly from British journalists. But then one remembers decades of Brit stupidity re: Ulster, and the Falklands.

 
'HIDDEN' CIVIL WAR ESCALATES: More and more Iraqis (Sunnis & Shiites) are 'disappearing', then reappearing as mutilated,tortured corpses.
GUARDIAN

Soon Shiites will learn to flee Sunni region, and Sunnis will learn to flee Shiite region..ethnic cleansing will have taken place.

Then the Shiites can set up their own mini-state in the South (like Kurdland in the North), with their own militia on guard. Americans will eventually pull out, leaving Saddamites in charge of SunniArab region. Only with such a scenario is there any chance to avoid a super-bloody civil war.

The sooner we pull out the better; THE LATER, THE WORSE !

 
"STABILITY AS IMPORTANT AS COMBAT !" says new Pentagon directive. That is, more civilians are needed to 'reconstruct' Afgh. & Iraq.
Millions of dollars (chump change for Pentagon!)are to be diverted from Pentagon to State Dept. NYTIMES

In other words, State Dept. is to be a hat-in-hand subordinate to Pentagon.
Before long, Pentagon will be called the "Dept of Peace & Prosperity', and will control all U.S. govt. activities.

 
ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE IRAQIS KILLED THIS WEEKEND (how many maimed or wounded?)

Since the recent landmark of 2000 GIs killed, 90 more have been killed.
(how many maimed or wounded?) USATODAY
----------
Bush says our Iraq project is 'on track'. And a bloody track it is.

 
'GET THE CLOD OUT OF TOWN !' That seems to be the slogan of 'W's handlers. First they ship him to SouthAmerica, where he gets picketed and has his 'free-trade' proposal coldly rejected.

Then they ship him to China, where he walks into a locked door trying to escape embarrassing questions, and he insults the Chinese regime by demanding more freedom for the minute proportion of Chinese Christians.
(Obviously that was a play for the hearing of U.S. fundamentalists, who are beginning to weaken in their doglike support.)

 
MORE HAWK NONSENSE [ltr to rMtnNews]
[This piece is worth refuting only because it is syndicated nation-wide by Scripps-Howard.]

Dan Thomasson [20Nov/link not available] trots out the usual hawk argument against criticizing Bush's war: this kind of 'attack', he claims, once "gave sustenance to the North Vietnamese and cost more lives by prolonging their stubborn refusal to negotiate an end." He offers no proof of this strange claim. It's ludicrous to think that Ho Chi Minh, who had fought off the French and then the Americans for decades, would have yielded if only there were no domestic criticism of the war for the ten years we wallowed in that fiasco.

Remember that the Soviets had to bug out of Afghanistan in the absence of domestic free-speech !

Then of course Thomasson says that present criticism will delay our extrication now from a bad situation(i.e, an unwinnable war started by the hawks) and thus, again, will cost more lives. In fact, world terrorists delight in our continuing this present fiasco, which better enables them to recruit new terrorists all over the world.

If the Iraq insurgents pay attention to U.S. opinion, they know that twice as many Americans feel strongly that this war is NOT 'worth it' as the number who feel strongly that it was. Insurgents also are happy to know that Bush has dictatorial powers until Jan.'09 and can defy public opinion mulishly to continue feeding GIs into their killing machine and helping them recruit and train new insurgents.
-----------------------
52% WANT US OUT IN 12 MONTHS. Two in three disapprove of Bush's handling of the war. REUTERS
(The others think that Adam & Eve rode dinosaurs to Church.)

 
SUNNIS,AMERICANS bypass Shiites: In Cairo, at the conference called by the Sunni Arab League, the Sunni President of Iraq revealed that he has been in touch with the Saddamite insurgent-leaders, seeking a compromise.
The Shiites were outraged, not having even been consulted--though the Pres. was 'working with the Americans', figuring they had the last word. GUARDIAN

It looks as if the Americans have admitted they can't subdue the Sunni guerillas; so they're willing to hand over the Sunni/Arab region to them openly, hoping the Saddamites will then turn on their fanatic Zarqawi allies.

Of course they can't speak for the Shiites & Kurds, who will secede from the semi-fictional 'all/Iraq' regime.

What remains to be settled is how to GUARANTEE to the Sunnis a 'fair share' of the oil money. That's the tricky bit.
-----------
Sunni at the conference said it wasn't so awful if insurgents killed innocent bystanders while attacking GIs (& our puppet militia). He said the innocent victims should be called 'martyrs'. That's like U.S. calling them 'collateral damage'.

 
IRAN & (SHIITE) IRAQ FORM CLOSER TIES: UnitedPress

The final outcome of our invasion (with or without a civil war) will likely be this: Three mini-states: Kurdland, Shialand, with the middle Sunni/Arab region a no-man's land, until it is controlled openly by Saddamite guerillas.

We will have set up a new ally for IRAN, our oldest enemy. Shiites will have most of Iraq's oil; together with their ally IRAN their oil reserves may exceed those of Saudi Arabia !

No wonder the Bushies want to bomb the hell out of Iran, to cover their blunder. But that would leave all of us in a far worse fix.

 
180 IRAQI CASUALTIES YESTERDAY; AT LEAST 60 DEAD TODAY, WITH EVEN MORE WOUNDED. REUTERS

Zarqawistas are succeeding in paving the way to civil war. Americans aren't helping to prevent it.

Ethnic cleansing (Sunnis out of Shiite areas; Shia out of Sunni areas) is proceeding. NYTIMES
---------------
FIVE GIs KILLED TODAY (SATURDAY) & 5 MORE WOUNDED.
NatlPublicRadio

 
TWO WAYS TO ASSIMILATE SUNNIS:
The publicly-announced way is to gently persuade them to use political means, not violence, to make their needs felt.

But a U.S. military source admitted that another way is for the 'Central Govt'. to ruthlessly SMASH Sunni resistance. UPI (After all, the Kurds + Shiites outnumber Sunnis 4 to 1 ! )

This might be called the 'Saddam-lite' option--his tactics without his person.

However, this won't work for 'central govt.' There will be 'ethnic cleansing' of mixed provinces (violent expulsion of minorities), but this will be managed by sectarian militias, not by the pathetic 'all/Iraq' forces U.S. is relying on.

 
SouthKorea WILL START PULLING TROOPS OUT OF IRAQ--said their govt. ONE DAY AFTER BUSH THANKED THEM FOR HELPING TO ESTABLISH 'DEMOCRACY' IN THE MIDDLE EAST.
FinTimes This announcement took Bushies by surprise; S.K. honcho didn't mention it in his talk the day before with Bush !

One by one, our 'partners' in the 'coalition of the unwilling' are pulling out.
If Bush intends to 'stay the course', our GIs will bear all the burden of death and suffering.

 
GUILT VS. HUMILIATION:
[Note: 'Many S are P' means 'more than you'd expect or want'.]
---------------------------------------
The popularity of the comic-strip 'GARFIELD' beautifully illustrates the moral blindness of many Americans. This cat is really evil: he kills birds and insects who talk--and now he admits with great insouciance that he murderously tampered with his human's brakes !

Garfield is liked and respected by many Americans. Little 'Garfield' dolls are seen displayed in cars. However, John, his nerdy human, is a ridiculous loser--though he harms nobody. Not only does he fail at getting dates, but he's sucker enough to put up with Garfield !

Americans are the most church-going people in the developed world.
54% of them believe the Bible literally when it says the world and humans were created in SIX DAYS! If a comic-strip approved of sexual misbehaviour, the papers would be flooded with protests by pious parents.

But nobody really objects to murderous Garfield. We snicker at pathetic John; but we laugh with guilty Garfield.

"Aw, c'mon--they're just birds & insects." No,not JUST birds/insects; they're creatures who talk. If we met them, we'd ascribe rights to them.

"Aw,c'mon! He's just a cat !" But a creature with the mind of a human and the morals of a cat--that's the very definition of a sociopath.

Garfield's tiny size assures us he'd be no real threat to us; so we can indulge here our admiration for criminals. Many of us realize, half-consciously, that we are law-abiding mainly from fear of punishment; naturally we admire the cleverness and courage of sociopaths. (The parents of a recent cannibal burned all his private belongings, lest they be sold as souvenirs.)
--------------------
Small wonder Americans are so easily led into pointless wars. Many Americans have now turned against the war : from guilt over their previous approval of an unjust war ? Or because of the humiliation felt (more each day!) over our being entangled in this unwinnable war?

Why only 1 in 5 Americans calling for IMMEDIATE pullout? Why only 3 Congressmen voting for this? Is it moral concern for not betraying our allies? Or is it (foolish) fear of MORE HUMILIATION at 'cut & run'?
----------------------
For more on guilt vs. humiliation, see STRUTTING AND FRETTING: STANDARDS FOR SELF ESTEEM--available by interlibrary loan; or it can be bought very cheaply from AMAZON.

PRIDE (desire for glory, fear of humiliation) is the mother of achievement and the sense of honor--also of folly and crime. We had better study PRIDE.

 
INSURGENTS MANAGE TODAY TO KILL EIGHTY-FIVE IRAQIS (one attack was on KURDISH mosque.) USATODAY,18Nov.
(Many more wounded, of course.)

These attacks may have been in retaliation for mistreatment of detainees by Kurd/Shiite regime. Shiite spokesman mentioned that none of these detainees had been beheaded. In other words, 'the other side's worse'.

Small wonder that only ONE IN A HUNDRED Iraqis think U.S. forces are contributing to their security. NOBODY is contributing to their security.

 
'TAXPAYERS' & PENTAGON SPENDING [ltr to USATODAY--link not available]

A spokesman for "NationalTaxpayers Union' [ltr18Nov]ascribes the ever-increasing federal deficit to excessive 'entitlement' spending (e.g., social security and welfare). But the present staggering deficit can hardly be ascribed to 'social security', since that fund is now taking in more than it's paying out !

He never mentions the $490 billion ($1350 millions each day) which the Senate will be shovelling to the Pentagon next year. That's more than the federal deficit; in other words, the rest of the government is living within its means; our deficit should be called the Pentagon Deficit. (Only a small portion of this money goes to pay for the Iraq war.)

Why isn't the 'Taxpayers Union' alarmed by this runaway Pentagon spending? Probably because their members are being subsidized by the Pentagon.

 
TURKEY/RUSSIA LINE UP TOGETHER. New pipeline from Russia, WHICH BUSHIES OPPOSE, is going in. Another triumph for Bushie diplomacy. NewsTelegraph

 
CONSTANT TURNOVER OF U.S. HONCHOS in Iraq is undermining the effort. Understandably, they don't want to stay long in such a nasty rat's-nest, with mortar-shells frequently exploding even inside the luxurious Green Zone. LATimes

The turnover of MILITARY honchos is especially shameless, given that the grunts on the bottom have to stay on for long times and often are forced to return for several stints ! But what else could you expect from a Pentagon run by 'chicken-hawk' civilians with no first-hand experience of war?
--------------
TWO & 1/2 YRS INTO THE WAR, IRAQ GIs ARE STILL NOT GETTING ADEQUATE BODY ARMOR. USATODAY
We're shocked but not surprised.

 
"BRING'EMHOME !" SAYS PRO-PENTAGON DEM. REPR. --
NOT "Pull out some" as goofy John Kerry says (there aren't enough there now! That would leave the remaining troops at MORE risk.)
No, Murtha says we should pull ALL of them out soon, and right now we should withdraw our troops to some place to keep them safe. REUTERS

Full transcript of Murtha's words: InfoClearinghouse

Of course if we pull our troops back to a safe base, and quit pretending they can fight the insurgents, GIs at the base might be subjected to shells filled with poison gas.
--------------------------
Murtha suggests that our troops should withdraw, say, to Kuwait--ready to rush back in if there's any big trouble. I've been suggesting something like this for months now in these pages. This move would spare our GIs more deaths and wounds; it would remove the provocation their presence offers, that moves Iraqis to support the guerillas; and hopefully it would remove from our dumb generals the temptation to go in there and 'clean out those nests of wasps' with bombs ! Also it would help the Bushies save face, withdrawing only that far--not boarding ships and bugging out entirely.

But NOT into Kuwait! As I remember, ordinary Kuwaitis, surprisingly, really hate our troops. When they were stationed there before the invasion, the Kuwaiti rulers had to basically clear out all the natives from the section we were occupying.

No, I thought the troops should be based in the quiet backparts of the Kurdish region, guarded by the Kurdish Peshmurga (now that they've quit killing each other). The Kurds seem to like us--and our troops' presence there would prevent any invasion of Kurdland by the Turks.
--------------------
Anyway, Murtha's speech may really mark the tipping point, where the Dems in Congress start making it hot for the GOP hawks. As the GI casualty rate in Iraq AND IN AFGHANISTAN (!) stays high or rises higher, the hawks facing election one year from now will start wandering from the nest--like the rats from a sinking ship.
--------------
TWENTY GI CASUALTIES WHEN BUS OVERTURNS IN KUWAIT.
Boston.Com Accident or sabotage?

 
TEN GIs KILLED YESTERDAY & TODAY / (More maimed or wounded! )

FIFTY-FOUR PERCENT of Americans want our troops out WITHIN TWELVE MONTHS. YahooNews

On the other hand, Americans turned against the Viet war in 1970, but our govt. went merrily on getting GIs killed and maimed for 5 more years.

But then America turned temporarily against War & GOP. Let's hope GOP & Pentagon leaders can pressure Bush to bugout (i.e. to pull out without victory). We've bugged out often before, without damage to us, from wars our goofy leaders barged into. Americans are now turning isolationist, saying (finally) that we should mind our own business internationally.

Americans are not really interested in the outside world; as a result they are even more ignorant of the outside world than they are on other matters.
Let's hope we'll soon end these reckless interventionist lunges based on ignorant isolationist thinking.

 
PUPPET-STRINGS REVEALED: U.S. was annoyed by the torture-prison for Sunnis just exposed, apparently managed by the Badr militia of Shiites. So they issued this edict: "There must not be militia or sectarian control or direction of Iraq security forces.." GUARDIAN

What? Iraq is supposed to be now a sovereign country, with an elected govt. and an approved constitution. Who are these foreigners telling what they must and must not do?

Aw, cmon. We all know that Bushies still run Iraq. Not very well, though...not very effectively...

 
AMER.MOVING TOWARD ISOLATIONISM: [NYTIMES] a new Pew poll:

42% (up from 30%): "We shd mind our own business internationally."

vs. unilateralism: Only 25% say we should take the most active leadership role in the world.

2 in 3 say we now enjoy less respect in the world (most say this is because of Iraq).

Most opinion-leaders say we WON'T est. a stable democracy in Iraq.
But 56% of ordinary people hope that we will.

40% of both groups (ordinaries & opinion leaders) expect Iraq to break into 3 mini-states.

52% disapprove of Bush's performance generally (87% of scientists and engineers.)

"Why haven't we had a 2d 9/11 attack?" Most say, by sheer luck
Only 1 in 3 say that our govt. has prevented it.

Interestingly, opinion leaders think our main ally will be India!

 
SHIITE TORTURE=ZARQAWI SUCCESS. Horrific stories of secret torture by Shiites of Sunni prisoners. NYTIMES

One can't much sympathize with those Sunnis who are hiding/funding the Zarqawi guerillas, who have been openly slaughtering Shiites. But of course who knows if those tortured were Z sympathizers?

Result of all this will be (a) increased likelihood of open civil war, when enraged Shiites start killing Sunnis at random, and the 'ethnic cleansing' in mixed regions begins in earnest.

(b) more likely, Shiites will NOT make the concessions needed to lure the Saddamite guerillas to turn on their Zarqawi fanatic allies. Any new concessions, amendments to the constitution, can be vetoed by 2/3 vote in any 3 provinces. No matter what the Shiite leaders want, ordinary Shia will NOT allow such concessions. So the Zarqawists come out ahead.

 
BUSH/CHENEY 'HIT BACK' AT WAR-CRITICS: They issue shamelss denials of what every literate person knows is true. FinTimes

Obviously they have despaired of convincing 'independents' or moderates.
They're worried about losing even the 35%-40% of ignoramuses who support them through thick and (perhaps not) thin. So they bluster, to please these ninnies.

At election time in '06, they may count on some great distraction to lure over another 10-15% to win. Perhaps another attack like 9/11.

 
ISRAELI WANTS US OUT OF IRAQ. A former Israeli PrimeMinister told a crowd inIndia that our troops there are now part of the problem.
WEBINDIA

 
KANSAS WOULD TEACH 'BOTH SIDES' ON EVOLUTION.These pols must realize that the typical Kansas student can't explain how insects differ from mammals. They certainly cannot follow the sophisticated debate between traditional evolutionists and honest Deistic 'intelligent design' advocates.

These rival positions should perhaps be taught to honor students in college;they might learn from these debates about the logic of the scientific method.(It would help if people would quit saying the only alternatives are science and theology; a third mode is philosophy: this is really a metaphysical issue.)
----------------
54% of Americans think God made world and humans IN SIX DAYS.
[Scripps-Howard News Svc. 16Nov]

 
SHAMELESS !
'Iraq-and the world-much safer without Saddam' headlines the shameless attempt by a Bushie [USATODAY] to justify Bush's invasion.

"Those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists." No evidence was offered showing that Saddam harbored terrorists.

--He 'openly supported suicide bombers' in Israel. So maybe Israel should have attacked him..but Sharon used his Bushie puppets, with thousands of GIs (instead of Israelis) killed, maimed or wounded. [Nineteen GI casualties just yesterday & today. BBC ]

--"Saddam openly violated UN resolutions". So has Israel, again and again.

--"Iraq repeatedly fired on our planes enforcing the 'no-fly-zone' protecting Kurds and Shiites." Shameless ! Those planes bombed Iraq, with no accountability about where they were bombing, for months before the invasion; indeed, it was admitted that they were bombing to weaken resistance for the invasion--a clear act of war--before Congress approved of the war--thus violating our Constitution.

--"Saddam used WMD (poison gas) against Kurds." We supported Saddam before and after that use./ After many denials, Pentagon now admits that U.S. used horrific White Phosporus as a weapon against Sunnis in Fallujah. BBC

--"Saddam invaded Kuwait". That was ten years before our invasion! He had been asssured (falsely) by our ambassador that we would not intervene if he did.

"A liberated Iraq can show the power of freedom to transform [MiddleEast] by bringing hope and progress into the lives of millions." wow. In fact, only 1 in 100 Iraqis think our occuping force has even improved security, let alone bringing them freedom, hope and progress. 8 in 10 object to our occupation--about 12 million of them (not just Sunnis) are so angry they approve of killing our GIs. Our new Shiite govt. has been torturing Sunni prisoners in Baghdad.

--"The world is safer without Saddam." Our occupation triggered a new alQuaeda presence in Iraq, recruiting new terrorists by our atrocious tactics, and facilitating the training of these recruits in actual guerilla-war tactics. (After many earlier failures in neighboring Jordan, they just succeeded in a spectacular, murderous attack on 3 hotels.) These Iraq-hardened-jihadists are filtering into other MidEast nations, ready to cause big trouble.

--Our invasion and our atrocities (photographed, with photos circluating all over the Muslim world), have likely enraged hundreds of thousands out of the 1200 million Muslims worldwide, enough to attack our allies (e.g., England) and finally to attack U.S. Most Americans finally realize that the invasion has made us LESS SAFE !
===========
The USATODAY 's own editorial recognizes that the war WAS a mistake, and naively hopes that if the Bushies ADMIT this, popular insistence on bugging out will diminish.

But sensible Americans will realize that the EXACT SAME TEAM of mendacious incompetents as lied and stumbled our way into the war in the first place--this same team would mismanage the war's extension.

It might help if Bush dumped his awful advisors: Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice. He might well also respectfully accept God's resignation from his cabinet.

 
SIX IN TEN AMERICANS SAY WAR WASN'T WORTH IT.
USATODAY
(Republicans are the most stubborn, but even they..)
Rummy says "We mustn't give the terrorists the idea they can outlast us."
Of course they know they can outlast us. They're in their own country;
our troops, knowing the folks back home think it's a mistake, are going to get more and more rebellious. We have no real stake in the war; of course we'll bugout--the sooner the better, the later the worse.

The longer we stay in this no-win conflict, the more our people will have an ever deeper attitude "Never another Iraq!" Let's hope they turn against the Pentagon, and demand a cut in their $1350 MILLIONS EACH DAY.
(New budget for Pentagon: nearly HALF A TRILLION for next year.)

 
BREATH-TAKING ROBOTS:
We're supposed to be thrilled about the 'dancing robot' who can actually follow another dancer's lead. [TIME MAG.,21NOV ] And the Pentagon has devised ingenius infantry-robots that can climb stairs, see through camera-eyes, and thus fight guerillas with their human masters sitting safely far away. (Too bad the Bushies couldn't wait a few years.)

However, such robots could also be used for a blatant Pentagon takeover of the U.S.A. We've always felt reassured that U.S. soldiers would never fire on Americans. But U.S. robots wouldn't hesitate.

Two interesting sidelights:--War would no longer be a male, heroic affair. Even today, fellows in Kansas could hop in their B-52s after breakfast, fly off to bomb the hell out of Afghanistan, and get home to play with their kids after supper. A woman could manage that as easily--just as a team of mean old women could manage a nuke-armed submarine and finish off a dozen cities in a few minutes. With more robotization, testosterone would become completely redundant, in war as it is now in space-flights and in the workplace.

--It would be black humor to watch the handgun enthusiasts, who see themselves as our protectors against despots, facing an impassive line of despot's robots.
---------------------------
We're supposed to be edified by the guy who invented and will circulate without profit $100 laptops for 'all the children in the world'. ABC
Now all these children will have access to internet porn--and to corporate adverts that will implant in them the sting of greed--greed which their poverty cannot satisfy.

This move might NOT increase world friendship with the U.S.
Decent people can get addicted to the porn, and still hate the country that offered them this temptation. And people newly aware of the wealth of the First World might hate us for their poverty.
------------------------------------------------------------
Luddism is the belief that megatech will do an enormous amount of good in our world, but even more harm. For a general theory trying to justify this grim expectation, click on LUDDITE.

 
THE IRAQI WOMAN WHOSE SUICIDE BOMB FAILED IN JORDAN--this woman volunteered to kill and die from rage at her 3 brothers being killed by Americans in Fallujah. NYTIMES

We should bear this story in mind the next time we read of our generals bragging that they just killed '50 insurgents'. Iraqi culture demands revenge against those killing one's relatives. No wonder our one general, in a rare moment of self-doubt, said ruefully "I kill one insurgent and thus recruit 3 more !"

 
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS FROM PENTAGON TO CORRUPT LEADER. In Krygistan, Pentagon bought (from companies controlled by then-President) jet fuel needed for its airplanes, in return for permission to have our base there. NYTIMES

The new K. regime wants us OUT. And this story reminds us of the hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars the Pentagon is spending overseas--all these expenditures count as IMPORTS, and contribute to our staggering TRADE deficit..Meanwhile, Greenspan warns again that this deficit cannot be maintained over the years--it's financed by the 'generosity' mainly of the Chinese and Japanese--generosity which could end at any time.

 
EVEN GOP SENATORS WANT OUT ! To castrate the Dem proposal to set a timetable for withdrawal, GOP Senators call for Iraqis taking over the fight vs. insurgents IN 2006 ! nytimes cited in FinTimes

It seems possible that sectarian militias of Iraqis could take over in Shiite and Kurdish areas. But what about the middle, Sunni/Arab region?

An Iraqi pol says the Saddamite guerillas (vs. Zarqawistas) do want a deal.
They demand first of all, that we set a timetable for pullout, then pull out now from the cities..this is a wish-list. LATimes

What kind of concessions would attract Saddamite guerillas to turn against their fanatic allies, the Zarqawists? The Saddamites would have to be given control of their region, openly.

Their region would have to have a 'mini-state' autonomy from any Shiite-controlled 'all/Iraq' regime.

Their region would have little oil..they'd be inheriting just a desert. They'd have to have a GUARANTEE of a 'fair' share of oil-money. (The only such guarantee imaginable is granting them some of the oil-rich lands--which one can't imagine being granted either by the Shiites or the Kurds !)

On the other hand, middle-region has 1st control of the WATER (Tigris & Euphrates) . That might be a bargaining-card vs. the Shiites. (I believe Saddam did cut down on water to Shiites, enough to ruin their wetlands.
Ah, but could the further-North Kurds then cut off water to Sunni/Arabs?
My geography is weak.)

About the dream that Saddamites would be pacified by Sunni voting:
---They know that even if every SunniArab voted, they'd still be outvoted FOUR TO ONE by Shiites & Kurds. They have nothing to gain by majoritarian democracy.

--They know they could post Sunni candidates, who would sit in the new assembly after next month--and still proceed with bomb-attacks on the Americans. After all, that's what IRA did for decades in Ulster !

--Until the Saddamites turn on the Zarqawists, the Zs can continue to attack the Shiites. They don't need to provoke a civil war, though that will likely happen. All they need to do is to enrage Shiites enough so a Shiite regime will balk at granting the needed concessions to Saddamites. This has probably already happened.
----------------------
Pentagon chatters about how many hundreds of thousands of our native militia have been 'trained & equipped'. But when asked about how many could fight guerillas without American backing (after we bugout), it turns out that only 700 are ready. [ABCNEWS, TV]
That's against at least 20,000 active guerillas.

This is after many months of training attempts. (That's the dismal 'all/Iraq' army sponsored by Americans. The Kurds have a quite efficient militia, the 'peshmerga'. And the Shiites can develop one.)

 
NEW POLLS VS. BUSH: Only 1 in 10 US adults would back a GOP Congressional candidate who agrees with Bush on most major issues! [USATODAY ]

7 IN 10 REPUBLICANS would back a candidate who had some disagreements with Bush.

By 12 points, people say country would be better off if Congress were controlled by Democrats.
----------
Good news ! On 29Nov., Bush will be at the Brown Palace in Denver to help the campaign of Marilyn Musgrave !

 
BUSHIES SAY THEY HAVE SPENT NEARLY $18,000 MILLIONS on reconstructing Iraq (e.g., restoring electric power). When Iraqi journalists asked where this reconstruction could be seen, our spokesmen said the locations are kept secret, lest the insurgents sabotage them again.
NYTIMES

In other words,"Trust Us ! "

One would imagine that the guerillas could find out easily enough which regions had electricity restored! The secret is to be kept from nosy journalists!

 
CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION QUESTIONS FDA DECISION NOT TO ALLOW MORNING-AFTER PILL TO BE SOLD WITHOUT PRESCRIPTION (as it is already in many countries). NYTIMES

Ho-hum. Who's surprised? This is a 'dog-bites-man' story. The fundamentalists (Catholic and Protestant) want to stop women from using this magic pill. So their puppets, the Bushies, will do what they can to help block this use.

There are three million unwanted pregnancies here every year. While some parents can offer love even to unwanted children, many such children will suffer child-neglect. (As the fifth of nine children born to a saintly mother in the Depression, I suffered neglect; she occasionally called me Freckles, which was the name of the dog.)

 
WHY HASN'T DOLLAR COLLAPSED? Acc. to econ.theory, it should have collapsed some time ago.

China and Japan hold enough dollars to buy a CONTROLLING SHARE of all big U.S. companies. But they won't..at least not for now.

The only sensible people seem to be those who are buying gold, instead of dollars.

One Problem: while all holders of dollars will suffer if its value sinks, the ones who sell out first will lose least. That seems to set up a scenario for a panic.

 
STATES WANT TO GOOSE UP MERCURY CONTROLS. Bush's EPA plan would reduce mercury in coal electric plants in the sweet bye-and-bye--but the states can, and perhaps will, impose stricter rules on the plants in their jurisdiction. GUARDIAN

Mercury pollutes fish and harms foetuses & children especially. One study compared mercury pollution levels in certain school districts with autistic children rate in those districts--and found a high correlation.

Middle-class Americans don't mind the right-wing pols trampling on the poor; and they're too dumb to realize that the same right-wing pols are weakening regulations that protect also the middle-class. GOP voters deserve this, but not middle-class liberals !

 
WHAT'S UP? The Kurdish Pres. named the end of '06 as a date when the Brit troops might 'start? finish?' a pullout of Iraq.And Blair and Defense Honcho Reid and some Brit general echoed this prediction--always assuming that Iraq troops can then ward off the guerillas in the Brit region by then. Fin.Times

At first sight, this guarantees nothing: '..always assuming...'On second sight, if they raise Brits' expectations and then can't deliver, the British people (already against their troops being in Iraq) will likely rise up in wrath, and the Labor rebel-MPs might well throw out the odious Blairites.

So this does establish some hope that the Shiite section of Iraq will be pacified by then (i.e., controlled by Shiite militias, NOT by the semi-fictitious 'all/Iraq' militias). In the same way, the heart of the Kurdish region is now pacified, under the control of their 'peshmurga' militia.

That likelihood will put more pressure on the Bushies to pull out, even though they have to deal with the Sunni/Arab region, which is the main focus of the guerillas. There's no likelihood at all that any Iraqi militia can control the Sunni guerillas in the middle region--not for years!

By then it will be U.S. GIs bearing all the suffering alone, without ANY fictitious 'coalition partners'. That won't help GOP in Nov. election!

 
BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE GIVES US AN 'F' MARK in warding off threatened nuclear attacks, 'the most grievous threat we face'. REUTERS

In fact the Bushies & GOP Congress should get an 'F' in warding off ANY of the numerous kinds of terrorist threat we face. One might claim that the most devastating threat is the threat of germ-war--against which the Bushies have not made any real efforts.

 
BUSHIES SAY THEY FOUND INFO on stolen laptop that proves Iran is moving to nuke weapons. GUARDIAN

This might be true, but who'd believe them?

U.S. NUKE EXPERT doubts that this laptop info does show that Iran is working on nuke weapons.

Iranians ridicule the idea that they would keep top-secrets on a laptop computer. Boston.Com

 
FIFTY-FOUR CASUALTIES on Monday,14Nov--including a few 'Westerners'. Reuters
Eleven GI casualties (2 dead) on Monday. InternatlHeraldTribune

FIFTY-ONE GIs KILLED IN 1ST 15 DAYS OF NOV. ABC
----------

FIFTEEN SUICIDE ATTACKS IN AFGH. THIS YEAR. NYTIMES
Bushies would like us to forget the 4-yr-old war they've neglected since they decided ALSO to invade Iraq !

 
THANKS FOR YOUR GLORY !When the Catholic Church translated the Latin Mass into English, they made an interesting error: In the GLORIA, the line GRATIAS AGIMUS TIBI, PROPTER MAGNAM GLORIAM TUAM should be translated as WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR GLORY--instead, it came out, in 'Safeway English', as 'We praise you for your Glory'.

The new bishops couldn't imagine why you would THANK someone for His glory--instead, he should be somewhat grateful for your praise.

In America the word GLORY is never used, except for athletes..great triumph in some other field is usually called 'achievement-satisfaction'. But we do see the splendor in the physical realm: the guy who dodges mountainous defenders to run for a touchdown; the basketball player who seems to float in the air as he deftly soars up for a basket. Highbrows here see the beauty of ballet performances, and great music. It wouldn't be absurd here to say 'I'm thankful to witness, or even hear about, that star performance.'

In the ancient world, the dreams of glory were grander. Herakles went down into Hades to rescue a friend's wife; unlike Orpheus, he succeeded. And then Jesus 'descended into Hell' to rescue all the worthies who were in Limbo waiting for Him to save them.

In the Easter hymn EXULTET, St.Augustine says an amazing thing about Adam's awful,fateful sin: "O felix culpa!" O happy fault, that merited so Godlike a redemption. God's Son volunteered to die a slave's death--and thereby saved the human race of slaves.

Whether you believe these stories to be literally true, or not--you can get the idea of a MORAL splendor that we should be grateful just to hear about.-----------
We now live in an awful dark age in America: sexual depravity, wholesale murder, and rampant stupidity on the TV--caused by the rampant greed of the corporate poohbahs. In Iraq, it's worse: our firing into cities shells of white phosphorus (burning to the bone)--matched by the guerillas' slaughter of Shiite women & children.

Like most men, I find it very hard to weep. When I hear about the ugly reality of so many present humans, I feel a dry, ridiculing rage.
But then I think of the sublime possibilities of human nature: e.g., the genius of Shakespeare and Mozart. And more important, the moral greatness of a few saints and heroes.

My favorite was Thomas More, who was as worldly-wise as Machiavelli, but as brave facing death as any early martyr.(The movie MAN FOR ALL SEASONS brought out his multiple excellence.)

But then I actually met a real, great human, a nun in Inchon, Korea named Sister Philomena (see piece below). Like More she combined sturdy good sense with heroic courage in the care for others.

We need to seek out stories of such human splendor. Then we can weep and be grateful.