The Razor’s Edge

Part the first

Compelling evidence is beginning to foreshadow the dewy precipice that America has bought into a rather bum deal. The National Journal has written a story about a Presidential Daily Brief that indicates the administration was given an opinion on the relationship between Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorism network that contradicts what the public was told.

This memo on its own has a chilling effect on the debate that the Bush/Cheney team has associated with terms like shameful and reprehensible. I find these revelations to be lacerating if true. The document itself is still under wraps as a classified document. According to the report, the administration has acknowledged the memo’s existence.

An article like this puts into play the notion that intelligence was received and ignored because it was a dissenting opinion.

Since it seems that everyone has been playing hard and fast with their accusations, I have this article from fact check.

I have the new Iraq Index. I have the Afghanistan Index. It has some good and indifferent information. I find it hard to judge based when it comes to some of the opinion polls.

Here’s a great idea. Why haven’t we been doing this all along, were we undermanned?

Have a Happy Thanksgiving.

Winning the War Despite Bush

Sisyphus thinks that something significant happened this weekend. We saw a stunt by congressional Republicans, a stunt that was reminiscent of the shutting down of the government back in those heady days of the 1990s. On the surface, it appears to be a stare down; the set up for a brawl in the playground. I see it as something that is a little more spontaneous than that. Congress acted and then responded to the question. Should we get out of Iraq? They also acknowledged that they are responsible for that action.

This I ran across this morning, “to ask the first question means more than half the way to its own solution, for it is the outcome of a most intense mental effort for the questioner to bring his mind to a crisis. The question indicates that the crisis is reached and the mind is ready to leave it behind.” From the Koan Exercise.

What happened, irregardless of the result, has opened up the debate. Why not leave Iraq? What is the definition of continued military presence? What we have now is a police action. What we are engaged in now lacks character. What we have now is in sweaty slippery hands. That my friends is becoming more difficult to be comfortable with. We can hurrah that through the holidays, we can think that a point was proven, yet, I think it was one of the most telling signs of what the future will bring. It brings to mind the play of 12 Angry Men.

What does bother me is the belief that questioning what the hell we are doing over there is aiding the enemy or disheartening the troops. I think one shortchanges the troops by suggesting that their belief in their duty is shaken by seeking a responsible resolve of what THEY are risking their lives for. I would think that a rational discussion of options would make the enemy become a little leery, because as of now we are backed up on our heels. If we started to fight, acted like this was a War, not a policed state, we might actually find the enemy and kill him. We would create a public relations campaign to engage the Iraqi civilian. We don’t do any of this, because well frankly the people who are running the show are frightened of the enemy.

Remember, they are the ones who have said, “They’re Everywhere!!!!”

War is not a gentleman’s game. But it doesn’t mean we have to lose our heads either. The Soviets were a formidable enemy. We survived them. The Nazi’s were a difficult enemy. We survived them. The Japanese were a surprising enemy. We survived them. All these enemies are much different than what we are fighting in Iraq. Rest assured, the competence of the leaders from those wars were questioned and they responded with results.

The question that sticks in my mind is the statement of how we must stay the course. What staying the course means to me, remaining a military presence, patrolling an occasional hot spot and effectively creating an adversarial role for anyone who wants to make progress in that country. That is counter productive for what the goal is, a free Iraq.

The question remains, Are we done yet? What is the defining qualifying goal? We don’t have WMD. Saddam Hussein is in jail and set for prosecution. An interim government is in place. Osama is not in Iraq, is he? My money is on him sitting, drinking and eating at his father’s house in Saudi. So, we got Elmer Fudd to stop chasing Bugs Bunny. We did that in Hollywood action film nior fashion. So, can we pick up our toys and go home? What else are we trying to accomplish? Nation building? World police? Do we have something else that we are protecting? I think we are well past the time when we can consider leaving Iraq as a simple cut and run policy. It could simply be a humane policy.

We are starting to get some intelligent debate on these issues. Former Florida Senator Bob Graham has a compelling opinion in the Washington Post. He states that from the evidence he saw, there was no eminent threat. He voted against the invasion. He has also spoke about terrorism in the most realistic sense since Gary Hart outlined what eventually came to be in September of ’01.

There was also a decent article in The Nation for the case of impeachment. Which all be told, really really should be considered soon by people that are interested in the direction of this country.

I find the story of white phosphorous to be a tragic tale of the fog of war. I don’t know how intentional it was, but did it help our cause if it is true, as well as that of the napalm? It is just one of those things you shake your head and wonder who is in charge of this taco stand?

Also tomorrow I am sure this speech by Richard the Torturer will make a splash considering what happened this weekend by the Republicans.

This article is just a barrel full of monkeys.

And for the good news and best news of the weekend….. Go Buckeyes!!