Friday, August 17, 2007

I read the news today, oh boy.

This from a recent Washington Post Article

Those positions only hardened yesterday with reports that the document would not be written by the Army general but instead would come from the White House, with input from Petraeus, Crocker and other administration officials.

"Americans deserve an even-handed assessment of conditions in Iraq. Sadly, we will only receive a snapshot from the same people who told us the mission was accomplished and the insurgency was in its last throes," warned House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.).

Is there any doubt of what this report will say? The 2004 elections where the Republicans got booted out of power didn't matter. The ISG (Iraq Study Group) didn't matter. Why on earth would there be any expectation that this would be any different?

To me, it will be a lot like Charlie Brown's teacher. You remember - woh, woh, woh, woh, woh. The kids understand her, but you have NO idea what she's talking about...

So, it will go:

Must stay the course, woh, woh, woh, woh, can't cut and run, woh, woh, woh, woh, woh, victory is just around the corner, woh, woh, woh, woh, woh, insurgency in its final throes, woh, woh, woh, woh, woh, must fight them there so we don't have to fight them here, woh, woh, woh, woh, Al Qaeda in Iraq same as Al Qaeda that attacked on 9/11, woh, woh, woh, woh.

Then this:

Iran is the reason for all of our problems in Iraq (no woh, woh, woh, woh - THAT will be very clear)

Iraq is not even the most pressing issue on the table. The most pressing issue is will we attack Iran?

Now, a lot of folks I know think I'm a maniac because I've been saying this for a few years (and, I'll admit, I'm influenced a little bit by my two favorite sites and A lot of folks say, why on earth would we attack Iran? The people in charge would be CRAZY to do something like that.

Here's a story for you:

"Cheney, who's long been skeptical of diplomacy with Iran, argued for military action if hard new evidence emerges of Iran's complicity in supporting anti-American forces in Iraq; for example, catching a truckload of fighters or weapons crossing into Iraq from Iran, one official said."

So, for Iran, we just need ONE TRUCK. For Iraq, we had mobile labs, yellow cake from Niger, reams and reams of documents - of course it was all fantasy, but hey, who's keeping track.

Don't forget all the military might in that region (aircraft carriers, air force jets in Iraq, etc)

Are we going to attack Iran or not? I hope that I reread this in two years and laugh because I was such a paranoid fool.

No comments: