"And the Democrats have lost their zeal about ending it."If the leadership ever had any zeal.I wouldn't confuse Harry Reid and Nancy ("Impeachment is off the table") Pelosi with the rank and file Democrats. The anti-war movement is still here and active around the world. Rallies are scheduled this month. Rummy's gone, Gonzo's going, Turd Blossom's gone, Tony Snow is going,  Craig's gone, Warner's going, Republicans are in disarray, etc. This is no time to give up.Tom

J. McCutchen

Iraq is a corpse. As Juan Cole put it yesterday, the next round of our "great national debate" on the greatest strategic disastter in US history is shaping up as Arguments over Night of the Living Dead in Iraq

An air of unreality, a stench, as once again, as ever, the US policy debate on Iraq has become a farce.

We have a Congress that has no idea what it is doing
Sargent with Apache Company, Baghdad

We used to see reports like this nightly during the Vietnam War. This is the first such I have seen on US network news - a report with commentary from two military psychologists on the NewsHour, narrated by a BRIT - from the Guardian UK which ran a lengthy Sunday article on the burnt out US military.

We can't come down. We never have time to rest

The US military is being decimated for nothing. Where, indeed, is the outrage?

I think perhaps the answer is in the reason we've lost the war. When a democracy fights ware it fights mass wars, not wars with a professional military class. The fact that this is not a mass war affects media coverage, explaining why the first real world piece on our troops in battle was produced by the British.

J. McCutchen

VICK! What about Craig? Within hours, the newsnets had found bathroom policing experts to tell us all about the ins and outs of toilet busts

You know, I decided to see if candidates were expressing outrage or other opinion about the war, but I just went to the Times and couldn't find a single article in the last week about anything the Democratic candidates or leadership said about anything. All we got was the latest supposed scandal, about that donor.

There was this, buried about 20 paragraphs into an article on Bush's forceful defense of the war. "Democrats balked at participating in the briefing with Mr. Edelman, who in July caused a furor when he rebuffed a request from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to see Pentagon contingency plans for withdrawing from Iraq by accusing her of assisting enemy propaganda."

Maybe I should just let you know whether there's enough opposition the middle of this month, when the deadline that the Democrats demanded comes up. Meanwhile, I sure have no trouble understanding why the public may think the war is going better. (And yeah, the focus on animals was a bit loony. When he wrote on the Middle East, MJR was all about facts and prescriptions. Even since he left the area of expertise, I keep wanting to ask him to count to 10 before writing.)

But yeah, I sure hope that when Congress is back in session we renew bills to end the war pronto. The GOP will block them, Bush will veto them if they can't, and he'd do what he pleases even if he signed a bill. The war will still go on, as long as Bush is president.  But only continued legislative action will leave the war clearly Bush's.  

John

http://www.haberarts.com/

An explanation, not an excuse.

The Bush/Cheney Junta's number one task, indeed their only task, is not to "win" in Iraq or even to change circumstances there. Rather, it is to promote the narrative and create a record to support the narrative that the Democrats "lost" Iraq.

Their only allegiance is to the military-national security state and the ruling class that owns it. They will do anything and everything to protect it and its privileges.

The Democrats are avoiding any real confrontation on Iraq or "national security" issues in an attempt to undermine the "Democrats lost Iraq" narrative.

I think the Democrats are wrong, that this will not work and that they should have spent all of this year exposing the Bush/Cheney Junta, and cementing in the minds of Americans that the Iraq invasion was a bad idea, based on lies and rife with corruption. They instead surrendered to the "support Our Brave Troops" bullshit.

It is important to recognize that a large portion of the Democratic "leadership" does not want to displace or control the elements of the military-national security state. They merely want to divert its benefits to their supporters.

As for us American citizens and our dreams of living in a free country? Well, tough shit. We lose. Again.

I have never forgotten the shock of seeing these coast guard teams resucing DOGS!! when they were to evacute PEOPLE during Katrina!  I was just shocked that caninines were more important than people. Entire teams devoted to resucing pets while people were housed in filth in that Metro Dome for 3 days with infants and the infirm dying from dehydration.

This country has gone batshyt crazy!!

It is rather unusual for me to question a rating, but do you seriously believe that a reference to the reality of an animal rescue league in Kuwait is trolling? I mention it to contrast attitudes toward companion animals in the Middle East and our society.

I will admit that an argument that the US population is incensed about Vick, and therefore should be more incensed as GWB is rather like "if we can put a man on the moon, we can cure the common cold." The moon metaphor fails because rocket science does not contribute much knowledge to the treatment of viral infectious disease. The Vick-GWB metaphor is valid to be indignant about, but does not consider the realities of perception, perhaps manipulated by the MSM, by the US public.

I can respond to some of your points in the post to which I am replying, but if you are going to troll-rate any disagreement with your indignation, is it worth bothering?

I thought you had more intellectual integrity, and tolerance of disagreement, to recognize a somewhat relevant comment rather than a troll. Apparently, I was wrong.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Well said. People keep treating the Iraq war in isolation, rather than considering it within the context of the highest-level national security policy. From a military standpoint, the Iraqi operation is a campaign within a theater within a national strategy. Vietnam was a similar case, with its strategic direction coming not from a headquarters in Saigon, but from Pacific Command in Hawaii. Pacific Command, in turn, passed on White House orders.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

I don't disagree as long as you're referring to most of the Democratic leadership (but not all Democrats). My point is the rank and file, the anti-war movement, etc. have to keep fighting the powers that be.Tom

I'll tell you. If we were sending dogs over to fight this war, and they were dying and being maimed like our soldiers, this war would have ended before it started.

Gosh, MJ, we are sending dogs to fight and die in Iraq.

Of course the only ones we read and hear about are the ones used to torture prisoners.

Think about the names of soldiers that spring to mind when discussing Iraq. Not so different is it?

Once when I was very young, my father was driving the family home. We drove by a farm where the farmer was beating his horse.

My father slammed on the brakes, grabbed a tire iron and headed across the field to discuss matters with the farmer.

The farmer very wisely chose not to continue beating his horse. My father was Irish and therefore loved to fight and drink and was superlative at both.

I will tell you frankly that if the farmer had been beating his wife, there is some doubt in my mind whether my father would have stopped.

I can still feel good about the first but not so good about the latter.

A man who will kill and torture dogs for fun and sport is not likely to be so kind to people I suspect.

I am not the slightest bit embarrassed about finding the crimes of Michael Vick most unpleasant. At the same time I am rather impressed by what appeared a quite sincere confession. I would not be so easily mollified if it was children or women Vick had killed but then maybe that's just me.

JMO.

Best, Terry

the people throughout the rest of the world must stand in awe at America's outrage over the mistreatment of dogs.

Al Queda probably does. The Prophet thought even less of them than MJ. :-)

Vietnamese like dogs very much BTW. Think they are very tasty.

Best, Terry

FOR the record, I'm a dog and cat lover. Have always had pets and even believe in animal rights. This isn't really about dogs.

I agree that this really isn't about dogs, but I ask you to examine a couple of ideas:

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Yes, but see, that's justified. Craig plead guilty to the charge of disorderly conduct. The dogs didn't, so they shouldn't be punished.

The dogs are like Ted Stevens and AlGon, get it?

As I suspected, your link goes to volunteer animal rescue organizations, not any formal rescue service such as the US Coast Guard, regional emergency medical services, National Guard, etc. They were volunteers, not under the Incident Command/National Response, who chose to make animal rescue their priority.

According to a number of emergency services lists I'm on, a goodly number of official rescue services will, in the situation where people will not leave without companion animals of reasonable size -- sorry, we can't help your horse -- the rescuers will take both as a recognition of a necessity to save the humans.

In less catastrophic conditions, emergency services still give attention to animals, although it's not necessarily the same as the response for humans. I well remember a friend that had an apartment fire, and, when she got home, found her houseguest and her cat under separate oxygen masks of the Fairfax County (VA) Fire Department.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

"Use the ammunition that's appropriate for the general public, not a base."Reid seems to think that means to roll over and play dead.Tom

And the pragmatic value of that point is, in a political context, what? Do you propose to find some way, in the immediate political future, to have them value Iraqi civilians more than American dogs? It might be nice, but it isn't going to happen.

If you want to change the position of the American public on Iraq, make points on the effects on Guardsmen and Reservists, and on their communities. Make points on budget reallocations, such as cuts in the funding of the Centers for Disease Control. Make points on the vulnerability of national infrastructure to accident as well as terrorism, and the lack of funding for that. Make points on funding of multibillion dollar projects, of questionable reliability against an unlikely threat, such as the national ballistic missile defense system.

Yet the American public is universally revolted by the abuse of dogs, MJ's point.

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

The Dems in congress make me sick. Never seen such cowardliness. Feckless and proud of it.

Bush asked for a $100 billion last spring. The Dems yelped and rolled over.

Bush says the surge is working. The Dems point to the their tummy to be scratched. Yes, it is working, says Hillary! (But with me, it'd work even better).

Bush wants another $50 billion pronto. Yes Sir! The Dems are here to serve you, commander!

The latest Zogby says Bush's leadership on Iraq is preferred to Reid/Pelosi's by a margin of 9 to 1. Nine to one!!

Public support for Congressional leadership on Iraq: 3 percent!

When are the netroots going to realize they've been had. 2006 was the biggest fraud perpetrated on the American people.

Forget about Larry Craig.
Bush is the guy in the main stall and the Dems in Congress are jumping over themselves to service him in full view of our children. And that, my friends, is disgusting!

Not to cut the feckless Dems any slack, believe me, but our republic may have reached the point where if a political party doesn't have control of the three branches of government, it doesn't have control over anything. That may be the key, however obscure to us, explaining what Dems in Congress are doing, or not doing now.

Rove believed that total rule by one party was the only way to realize Republican goals, so whatever he advocated was directed to eventually make the Democrats the permanent minority party across the board.

And, I have a terrible feeling that the interests and needs of the American people figure very little in this power struggle, no matter which party wins the battle.

Whiterosebuddy,
In regards to the dogs, a very pessimistic friend
(African-American) said of Vick, "Somebody's got to do O.J Simpson's time."
A Southern Caucasian friend from Arkansas said some good old boys that she knew who admitted to participating in dogfights were upset because of the method used to kill the dogs: electrocution and drowning, rather than a bullet to the head.
When I read your statement about NOLA, I did think about the scene in "Hotel Rwanda" where a dog is shown on a bus headed for safety, while Rwandans were left to fend for themselves.
I'm a long time dog lover, but I understand your feelings.
Regarding the soldiers: they have become like the Rwandans. We do not see the bodies coming back, most Americans don't have a close relative in the war, and we are made to feel good by seeing stories of the wounded rebounding to build strong lives (on CNN's heroes segments, for example. We also get to donate to rehabilitation centers paid for by US citizens (not the DOD or any other government branch).
I'm willing to bet that the government would find funds to rehab a bomb sniffing dog injured by an explsion or bullet, if the event was publicized. No red tape for the dog or veterinarians to deal with.
The public finds it easier to focus on pets rather than the personalization that has to occur to take a stand for a large number of suffering humans. Please don't show Rwandans, or video of military people crying in pain from their wounds or dead in the dessert.
Roll tape of the highway patrol in one state stopping traffic on a multi-lane highway for
a dog who wandered on to the road.
We don't get news, I think the proper term is fark.

We won WWII, and most certainly Germany and Japan were left in ruins with millions of their citizens dead and injured. The same is true in Iraq. You win a war when you achieve the objective of the war, and the only objective I see for the Iraq war was getting rid of Saddam and the "terrorist threat" and "wmd threat" he posed to our country. We did those things quickly, so we won.

Our victory over Germany and Japan was not completed by setting up favorable governments in those two countries. Victory occurred with the surrenders of those countries. In Iraq, we left no government that was available to surrender, but we won anyway. Post war activities in Germany and Japan were successful in replacing the defeated governments with new ones we approved of. Post war activities in Iraq have been and will always be unsuccessful at doing the same. Totally different situations, but we still won the war in Iraq as we did in Germany and Japan.

Hoppy in Sacramento

We didn't just lose the war. We lost it ignominiously.

When you're a superpower and in Year 5 of the war, you still haven't controlled Haifa Street, right in the middle of the capital city, you've lost.

When you've empowered your sworn enemy, Iran, and there's nothing you can do about it, you've lost.

And, no, we haven't accomplished any of our objectives. Getting rid of Saddam was a means to an end, and we haven't achieved that end.
The goal was to make Iraq friendly to US interests and project US power. We've made Iraq an enemy and we've projected pathetic weakness.

It's not just a defeat for the US. It's the most consequential and humiliating defeat this country has ever known.

It is shameful in comparison to the Vick nonsense.

"One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic." Joseph Stalin

Also attributed to that fine leader is this quote: "Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs."

I take exception to "Vick nonsense." Despite the wisdom of Joseph Stalin, some of we purported humans are also afflicted with an inhuman gratitude to dogs.

That changes nothing whatever in regard to the abominable occupation of Iraq that nearly every Democratic candidate for the presidency as well as all but one announced Republican support.

Best, Terry

I mentioned the issue of the date. Congress is not in session, Clinton and Obama are off campaigning and hitting at each other, Bush is out of Washington (as during that infamous time leading up to 9/11), the resignations and gay "trolling" are usurping the news, the anchors are on vacation, most of all the big deadline is September 15 for evaluating the surge, and anyway, as Yglesias says today about the Bushies themselves, you don't roll out a new product in August. 

So suggestion: rather than whine and feel ever so self-righteous, while conveniently writing off the opposition party as cretins, do something. Let your representatives in the house and senate know that you're expecting action.

John 

http://www.haberarts.com/

And, I have a terrible feeling that the interests and needs of the American people figure very little in this power struggle, no matter which party wins the battle.

As long as the two controlling parties are the Republicans and the DLC arm of the Democrat party, 80/85% of the public will be in retrograde.

Dump the DLC and the blue dog Dems, replace them with Liberals.

Reagan allowed the worst elements of the Republican party to become acceptable. Since then they have been coming out from under their rocks until today they control the Republican party. This is who the DLC
find themselves agreeing with on some issues. Maybe all too many issues.

Remember, "If you dance with the devil, he doesn't change, you do."

Thank you.

I suspected that was pretty much the way it was.

Maybe some here will remember one notable exception. Senator Young from Ohio, a huge upset winner after years as a sacrificial lamb, used to have vitriolic exchanges with correspondents. Once sent one constituent a collect telegram saying, "You're a liar."

Not many such politicians.

Sen. Young, who wasn't, loved being a senator but followed his own star.

Best, Terry

It's time for a radical solution: voting. As long as the left 1) whines and 2)votes for the candidate they whine about, we're going to continue to be ignored if not held in out right contempt.

The left needs to follow the path of the Reagan Democrats. Just say no. Just stop voting for candidates who no longer represent your values. If they won't count the mail, force them to count the votes they don't get. I say make it 5-15%. Make it count. Make it be the difference.

People say, well you can't win. You don't win when none of your issues are represented or even heard. You win by making those issues heard in the public square. You win by making people pay attention. You win by being the difference not lost in a silent "majority" of people voting for candidates they don't believe and issues they don't believe in.

P.P.S. BTW how's the outrage thingie working out with the Israel/Palestine situation?

Your post is correct, but I wish someone would retire this inaccurate cant about the US never having lost a battle in Vietnam. On numerous occasions, US units of up to battalion size encountered traps set by NVA units, were decimated (losing most of several companies, hundreds of casualties at a time), retreated, and then counterattacked with reinforcements only to find the NVA long gone. On some occasions, the US Army deliberately concealed details of what had happened and recorded wildly speculative claims by American soldiers of NVA body counts, in order to make it appear that US troops had not been badly beaten. In other cases one supposes that the US military has decided such engagements are too small to count as "battles", or were not defeats because the NVA abandoned the territory. Since NVA strategy did not key on holding territory, but on selectively bleeding the enemy at moments of its choosing (and avoiding engagement at other times), this attitude misses the point. The old story about the American officer who tells a Vietnamese officer in the early 90s, "We never lost a battle," and the Vietnamese officer who replies, "True, but irrelevant," is almost certainly apocryphal.

"All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." - I.F. Stone

My father slammed on the brakes, grabbed a tire iron and headed across the field to discuss matters with the farmer.The farmer very wisely chose not to continue beating his horse. My father was Irish and therefore loved to fight and drink and was superlative at both.I will tell you frankly that if the farmer had been beating his wife, there is some doubt in my mind whether my father would have stopped.I can still feel good about the first but not so good about the latter.

A man who will kill and torture dogs for fun and sport is not likely to be so kind to people I suspect.

Right, but what happens to man's courage of conviction and outrage at inhumane acts when it comes to a man beating his wife vs. a horse?  You openly acknowledge that your father was far more likely to defend a defenseless animal than a defenseless HUMAN Being..with no shame you post such on a public board.

. Lots of humanity for dogs/cats/horses but none for man himself? 

unbelievable

Our society is sick.

What is the evidence that "mostAmericans think the war is succeeding"? I'm looking at PollingReport.com. The last poll they list on Iraq is still a CBS poll from Aug 8-12 that had 69% disapproving of Bush's handling vs. 29% approving. On how the war was going, 38% said very bad, 29% said bad, 26% said well, 3% said very well. Maybe things have changed since then, but where's the data?

Update: the most recent poll is the Gallup Aug 17-20 one. Here's a summary from UPI:

The poll also revealed a deeply divided American nation on the basic subject of whether the war in Iraq should still be fought or not. Some 30.2 percent still strongly supported the war with 12.4 percent saying they somewhat supported it. These figures gave Bush a combined support base of 42.6 percent.

The figures opposing the war were considerably higher, but it was the intensity of the opposition rather than the numbers of those opposed that will be disquieting to Republican Party political strategists.

Only 6.5 percent of respondents "somewhat" opposed the continuation of the war, but a whopping 50.0 percent "strongly" opposed it.

Some 50 percent in opposition is the strongest such figure in opposition to any war the United States has fought since the grimmest period of the Vietnam War. But it is the intense commitment of a full half of the electorate to oppose the war that is the more significant figure. It is much larger than the regular Democratic support base in almost every presidential election over the past 30 years.

And from a poll last week by a GOP pollster, Strategic Vision:

Sixty-five percent of Iowa Republicans polled said it was important to find a 2008 presidential candidate in the conservative mold of Reagan. The poll also found 51% of them want to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within six months.

That's 51 percent of REPUBLICANS. In IOWA.

I think what MJ is responding to here is the figure from a Zogby poll that "54 percent of Americans do not think the war is lost yet". Let's just say that question seems to stack the deck a bit. I think MJ has gotten rolled here by the Washington media establishment, which is falling for this Admin PR crap just as they've fallen for it for the last 6 years. DC media may have convinced themselves that Americans are more enthusiastic about the war, but the data shows nothing of the sort. The American people have turned against this war, and they're not turning back. The problem is the gutless wimps in the Democratic congress who won't do the right thing and end the war, even though it's what the people want.

"All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." - I.F. Stone

It might be. In a different context.

You openly acknowledge that your father was far more likely to defend a defenseless animal than a defenseless HUMAN Being..with no shame you post such on a public board.

Whiterosebuddy,

If my father were a psychopathic mass murderer who was also a vegetarian because he thought it terrible to harm animals like a certain unmentionable leader, why would I be ashamed? I am not responsible for any of my ancestors anymore than you are yours.

I offered an opinion from experience with human beings. Do you really have need to see the many examples and academic studies that show why the great majority of humans stand idly by in crowds while another is attacked, at least until one or more lonely souls take action?

I offered that it was a fine thing to stop a man from beating a horse? Do you disagree with that for some reason?

I also implied that it might not have been such a fine thing to do the man in but I guess you didn't catch that.

Our society is sick.

Indeed.

All societies are.

One manifestation is abuse of dogs.

Best, Terry

Finding out the staffer responsible for an issue, and sending a focused communication to them, can be more effective. It usually bypasses the low-level mail sorting people.

Now, the content of the communication should be something that is usable by the staffer. It can be a way to push legislation the member is supporting, a way to fight things to which he is opposed, expert opinion relating to an issue before the committee, etc. If you can represent a group of constituents, make that clear.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

I suppose you are right HC, no doubt Iraqi's and increasing numbers of others throughout the world value Americans lower than their local canines also.

when you flame the flames, they only get bigger. left alone, they burn out more quickly.

To boldly go...

You win a war when you achieve the objective of the war

if the object of war is peace, then I don't think we've ever "won a war." As far as I can tell, the USA gobbled up the german scientists after WWII and continued the war in a different another form until it became visible again in the mideast.

but we still won the war in Iraq as we did in Germany and Japan.

I suppose it's a subjective thing...

I saw an oped piece in the LaTimes that rambled on and on about peacemakers being part of the "peace racket," an apparent attempt to conjure up something that counters the "military industrial complex" label.

After I read it, I hurled...

To boldly go...

In my opinion the press would report it entirely as an abandonment of the troops by the Democrats, not by Bush, and the average voter would want to condemn Democrats to Hell for doing that.
Sure. That explains why ALL the exit polls showed that people put the Dems in office to get us out of Iraq.

I think Pelosi and Reed agree with me.
You have identified the problem precisely.

Even if you, Pelosi, Reed, Clinton and all the other cowardly Dems are right, you're wrong. Managing the war via the purse would be the right thing to do. Wouldn't it be sweet to have politicians do the right thing because it was the right thing? Just once in the 21st Century? It's what I want for my 60th birthday in about three weeks.

You are eminently correct. Nor does the question of the source of homosexuality relate particularly well to Tucker Carlson's beating up a pathetic gay man, but we don't let a little thing like that slow us down, do we?

Please forgive all my instances of pulling your off-topic remarks off topic.

I'm 71, going on 72. That seems to be on the far side of 50. And, I am not the problem. The news media have the ability to persuade the average voter that the sun rises in the west. That is the major problem.

Hoppy in Sacramento