"Military Experts see US Iraq Exit by 2016"

I got this from Raw Story but it's actually from a Washington Times piece. You can check out the full article at a registration restricted HERE. (if you happen to register to The Washington Times).
Here is the the point I want to highlight.

U.S. war commanders think some level of American forces will be needed in Iraq until 2016 and those forces will receive continued support from the vast majority of Iraqis.

I feel like I'm living in some Bizarro world.

Point One: Is it possible they believe the US public is going to support another DECADE of this fiasco?

Point Two: Are they under the impression that even NOW that the 'vast majority' of Iraqis support us?

No wonder things are so f'd up. Nothing another decade of rape scandals, civilian murders and crap we can't even imagine at this point causes the Iraqi people to continue loving us with IED's and sniper fire. Don't get me wrong. I understand these are isolated events and that the vast majority of the soldiers stationed over there are doing their best under brutal conditions but I see it like this. I trust the cops in my town. I think they are generally good, solid guys who care about the community. I might not like getting pulled over but I understand that's part of the price we pay for law and order. But if I read that a few of them had raped and murdered a teenage girl, then murdered her family, then burned them all to cover up the crime...well I might not look at the rest of them in the same way. It boggles my mind that professional military men could say things so daft...
-------------------------------------------------------
Interesting little piece on the US News and World Report site on the NY Times banking surveillance 'scandal'. Turns out the Treasury Department, when they initiated the plan in 2003 EXPECTED THE STORY TO LEAK! In fact, they included a press plan:) So the story that isn't really a story and yet continues to be a story...
>>>>>>
Speaking of which. I just read this bizarre article from Slate.com penned by the rapidly getting weirder Christopher Hitchens. Let me get this out. I like Hitchens. I loved 'No one Left to Lie to" and appreciated his near total demolition of insane British Pol George Galloway. That said, what the hell is his Slate piece titled, "The End of the Affair: Novak exonerates the Bushies in the Plame case" all about? I thought...what the f*ck? He argues that Novaks explanation...

have dissolved any remaining doubt about the mad theory that the Bush administration "outed" Ms. Valerie Plame as revenge for her husband's refusal to confirm the report by British intelligence that Iraqi officials had visited Niger in search of uranium

Any remaining doubt? Are you crazy? There is a ton of evidence that's exactly what the administration was doing. I don't understand...I really don't.



Someone please explain that to me...until then...

Stay Naked.

ad