Are we over our head in Iraq?

We are not supposed to be at peace. We must conquer to satisfy the lust for power and resource. In order to conquer we must have enemies, so we will always have them, until there is nothing more to conquer. that will not happen because today's conqueror eventually becomes tomorrows conquered, and the cycle continues unabated.

A few well chosen people will become so wealthy by these continuing actions that they will be insulated from all troubles and will live like Gods. the Husseins, Bushs', Royal Families in Saudi etc.
they understand that they must have enemies and wars in order to maintain and grow their power, and these leaders themselves are not enemies at all but chessmasters, profiteers and warlords.

The rest of us are flesh bullets.

It has been this way from day one, and will never change without the intervention of a benign dictator, a messiah if you will.
Problem is, a benign divinity usually ends up nailed to a tree, so by it's very definition can't be effective.

Iraq Policy in Crisis


Published: November 13, 200 The abrupt recall of America's top administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer III, for two days of urgent White House consultations signals a new level of alarm among American policy makers. Anxieties in Washington surely deepened yesterday after the bombing of an Italian military police compound killed at least 17 Italians and 9 Iraqis.
Administration officials, from President Bush on down, have been pressing Mr. Bremer to speed the transfer of sovereignty to appointed Iraqi officials and to compress, radically, the one- to two-year timetable he drew up for holding elections. There is some merit in these suggestions. We have long called for a quicker transfer of real power to Iraqis, as have most of America's allies. What is troubling, however, is the notion of short-circuiting the time necessary to draw up a workable constitution and conduct fair elections in a country as torn and troubled as Iraq. Such thinking suggests that the Bush administration is in such a rush to bring American troops home that it has lost interest in laying the foundations for a stable democracy.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/13/opinion/13THU2.html?th

Japan balks at sending Iraq force



BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 13 — As the death toll from a devastating attack on an Italian compound in southern Iraq rose to 32, including 19 Italians, Japan said Thursday it was reconsidering its planned dispatch of non-combat forces to Iraq. Meanwhile, grappling with the expanding insurgency, U.S. forces launched two attacks on alleged guerrilla targets around Baghdad.

And than there were none. A few more bombings and we will be completely alone. Coalition, what is that?
http://www.msnbc.com/news/870749.asp?0dm=C13MN

Au
Au, we are not only over our heads, we are over our stupid arses, as well.

BBB

War Declared, Again
We're not pulling out of Iraq, so it's logical that we're pushing in deeper.
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2003, at 4:04 PM PT

And so it's official: "Postwar Iraq" is just another term for "Iraq War—Phase II."
In a heavily guarded news conference in Baghdad today, Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, called the state of conflict there a "war." John Burns, the New York Times correspondent covering the event, quotes Sanchez's aides noting that the general's choice of words was deliberate—his way of injecting realism into the debate back in Washington. "We are taking the fight into the safe havens of the enemy in the heartland of the country," Sanchez stated. That sounds like war, all right.
To reinforce the impression, word also got around today that the White House has called L. Paul Bremer back to Washington for talks. Bremer is the civilian chief of the U.S.-led occupation authority. He left Baghdad quite promptly, deferring a long-scheduled meeting with the Polish prime minister, whose own troops have recently arrived in country for patrol duties. The guess around the Pentagon is that Bremer's role in postwar reconstruction will probably be scaled back, if not suspended, at least until the war is really over.


http://slate.msn.com/id/2091122/

If only the problem were "Are we in over our head in Iraq?"

Unfortunately, the problem is much more severe.

"Is this administration in over its head?" is actually the question.

And if the answer to that is, as I suppose it is: YES, YES, YES -- A THOUSAND TIMES YES!!!...

...then probably we are in over our head in Iraq, in economic policy, in foreign policy, in.....you fill in the blanks.

Re: Au


If yer head is in yer arse - there is not much difference!

Re: Au

Tokyo and Seoul backtrack on Iraq

http://www.iht.com/articles/117641.html

U.S. to speed hand-over in Iraq


http://www.iht.com/articles/117654.htm

The term 'speed' in this case means nothing, we're still looking at years.

America's Iraq policy in crisis
NYT NYT


The abrupt recall of America's top administrator in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer 3rd, for two days of urgent White House consultations signals a new level of alarm among American policymakers. Anxieties in Washington surely deepened on Wednesday after the bombing of an Italian military police compound killed at least 17 Italians and nine Iraqis..
Administration officials, from President George W. Bush on down, have been pressing Bremer to speed the transfer of sovereignty to appointed Iraqi officials and to compress, radically, the one- to two-year timetable he drew up for holding elections. There is some merit in these suggestions. We have long called for a quicker transfer of real power to Iraqis, as have most of America's allies. What is troubling, however, is the notion of short-circuiting the time necessary to draw up a workable constitution and conduct fair elections in a country as torn and troubled as Iraq. Such thinking suggests that the Bush administration is in such a rush to bring American troops home that it has lost interest in laying the foundations for a stable democracy..
The White House recently began shifting its case for the Iraq war from the embarrassing unconventional weapons issue to the lofty vision of creating an exemplary democracy in Iraq. Bush would look breathtakingly cynical if he seemed to be rushing the preparation for real elections with an eye toward improving his own re-election chances..
A much better way to manage the process would be to transfer political authority to a newly created UN administration. Constitutional development and election supervision are areas where the United Nations has built-in legitimacy and experience. Creating a UN administration for Iraq could also help attract more international peacekeeping troops to relieve America's overstrained forces - a need made even more urgent by Wednesday's attack on the Italians. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy has never had much support at home for keeping troops in Iraq and may now face calls for withdrawing the more than 2,000 Italians in Iraq..
The grim truth is that there are no very attractive options in Iraq. The Bush administration would clearly love to be able to remove American troops from the line of fire. So would we. Yet a rushed American withdrawal without an orderly handoff to the United Nations would leave Iraq open to just the kind of mixture of misgovernment and terrorism that the White House waged this war to prevent.

Viable Options?
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1113-05.htm

Excellent link, Pistoff.

But my bet is that Bush and his handlers won't listen to that kind of advice until way too late.

March or the latest April
If the situation is still deteriorating by then the Dumbyia re-election will be in serious doubt. Since I am not a Dem. or Repub. I am in a quandry because I feel that neither party has much to offer the Working Class. Iraq is a huge problem but Exporting Amerika is a bigger problem.

America's Gamble: A Quick Exit Plan for Iraq
plan number?

Bush and company is now reduced to clutching at straws. And I have no doubt to the delight of many of the nations of the world. An example of how the mighty have fallen or at least tripping over their feet or tongue in the instances. Where is the bravado emanating from the White House now? I wonder?


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/16/international/middleeast/16ASSE.html?th

Editorial
Iraq goes sour
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/16/opinion/16SUN1.html?th