This is what's guiding bush now.....

[rodeodance]

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/files/200612141_choosingvictory6.pdf

[Joanne98]

1. They never worry about how they're going to pay for anything.

Just put it on the credit card.

[jaxx]

2. And when this doesn't work either?

They will spend us into oblivion. I noticed no info on how this money will be snatched from our piggy banks, or how it would ever be paid back. And then there will be the deaths.......our troops deaths......but then they have never worried about that so why start now.

[krispos42]

3. Well, it's nice to see what the plan is

Lord knows BushCo won't say anything about it.

I have some questions.

If it so vital to prevail in Iraq, then:

Why did BushCo not go in with enough troops in the first place?

Why haven't restored basic utility services in the intervening 44 months since the invasion?

Why was the Iraqi Army allowed to dissolve after the fall of Baghdad, and why were no attempts made to recall it before it became scattered?

Why did Rumsfeld actively prevent planning of 'Phase 4' postwar reconstruction and rebuilding efforts?

Why has BushCo not raised taxes to fund the war that they themselves declare to be 'vital'?

Why has BushCo not asked Congress to implement a draft to meet manpower requirements in Iraq?

Why has BushCo actively taken conscription off of the table?

Victory Is Vital

•The U.S. must prevail in Iraq to secure our vital national interests
•Failure in Iraq will likely lead to:
–Widespread regional conflict
–Humanitarian catastrophe
–Terrorist sanctuaries
–Further radicalization of the Muslim World
–Loss of American credibility globally
–Damage to the morale of the U.S. military

If the costs of losing in Iraq are so high, then:

Why did BushCo actively promote this war and invasion in the first place when there was no reason to?

Why did BushCo actively cherrypick, distort, and fabricate evidence to justify the war?

Why did BushCo actively ignore and repress evidence that disproved the justification of the war?

Why did BushCo routinely use worse-case scenarios instead of most probable?

Why did BushCo undertake policies to inflame the Iraqi civilian population, e.g. Abu Gharib?

Why did BushCo keep in command incompetent leadership long after the incmpetence was revealed?


Having essentially lost the occupation of Iraq, then:

Why does BushCo not accept personal responsibility for the failure?

Why does BushCo, after turning the entire world off with regards to the US, not resign so that a new face of America can emerge and begin to heal both Iraq and our image in the world?

And, finally, what makes anybody on the planet that the BushCo will suddenly become competent, just because the cost of losing in Iraq are so high?

[leveymg]

5. These are all great questions. Hopefully, Congress is going

to squeeeze the answers out of the White House and agencies.

[leveymg]

4. This reminds me a lot of Obaid's PowerPoint presentation

Same line of thinking: they both want the US to put down the Shi'a insurgency by bloody attrition, and don't care if that takes just about forever.

Go to: http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/newsletters/2006/newsletter-179.html

Find:

Disintegrating Iraq: Implications for Saudi National Security - Washington, DC - October 30-31st - 15th Annual Arab-US Policymakers Conference - National Council on US-Arab Relations (PDF)