Bush: OK, I've got a plan. No, this one will work, honest.

They aren't all going to Baghdad, 3_B_F.

And it won't make a lick of difference. I just listened to a General testifying before Congress say what we all know: Short of a change in the Iraqi political scene, nothing we can do now will ultimately change anything.

 

And that's been true FOREVER, but it didn't stop the jugeared baboon from barging right in, with no Plan B.

Putz.

 

Obviously he knows he's/we're in trouble. That's why he attempted to take the blame. It seems to me like he's betting the rest of his chips that securing Baghdad will give the government, police, Iraqi army the time it needs to get its shit together so we can start redeploying by the end of the year.

I think, Zeke, more than the majority of those soldiers are headed to Baghdad.

 

IMO, he's not even thinking about victory at this point. He's just trying to postpone defeat until he leaves office, so it can be blamed on his successor and not on him.

That's all this Iraq war was - a power play to take care of his Daddy's unfinished business and achieve other strictly short-term goals, done under the guise of wiping out terrorism in the wake of 9/11. Fredo has never had to clean up his own mess before, and he'll do his damndest to make sure he doesn't have to here either.

 

Condi testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today and didn't get the warmest of welcomes:

Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio also said Bush could no longer count on his support.

“You’re going to have to do a much better job” explaining the rationale for the war, “and so is the president,” Voinovich told Rice. “I’ve gone along with the president on this and I’ve bought into his dream and at this stage of the game I just don’t think it’s going to happen.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16579285/

 

Sam Brownback, who plans on to run for president and is as conservative as they come, has said that he does not support a troop surge until the political realities change in Iraq. When the history of this war is written in 50 years, this might be seen as the turning point here at home when even Republicans decided they could no longer support Bush.

 

Those who embrace reality, though, would see it as political card-playing.

 

Yes, but the idea that someone who wants the GOP nomination -- as a conservative -- could oppose one of Bush's major military initiatives and have it be to his political benefit shows just how far Bush's stock has fallen within the party.

 

And?

Just curious, but how is that relevant now?

 

If Bush can't get the Sam Brownbacks of Congress to support the troop surge, the idea is DOA.

 

It's not DOA. It only becomes DOA, like we all want it to be, when Congress grows some balls and cuts off the funding.

Until then, it ain't DOA. May be a bad idea, but the show's going on. Therefore, all this back-and-forth bantering isn't worth the paper on which it's written.

 

Or that he has a strategy for political card-playing.