So the Petreaus/Crocker Puppet Show (now with New Ultra-Brite Powerpoint Lies) is finally over, and our Dear Deciderer-in-Chief plans to explain to us how our bold New Way Forward, has been so successful that it's time to make gradually make our way backwards to where we were before "The Surge", The Iraq Study Group and the 2006 Elections all began.
Isn't doing the Iraq Hokey-Pokey Fun?
Oh, but wait this just in Sheik Sattar Abu Risha - the too bit petty thug turned hero of the Amazing Anbar Awakening - has just been capped like an upstart rival of Tony Soprano.
Oops.
Guess, we're headed even further backwards than even Dubya thought.
Despite the sad and obvious reality that even the vaunted Al-Anbar province isn't really as safe and secure as it has been touted to be, the likelyhood that todays events will change even a single sentence in the Prez's planned speech tonight hover somewhere inside the infinate span between nil and a cold hole and the hell-hot place.
Tony Snow in his final White House bullshitting session Press Conference said it yesterday.
The idea that you have an unchanging strategy -- only a crazy person would fail to adjust strategy on a regular basis based on the realities on the ground.
Former Shameless Authoritarian Shill Says Wha?
It's really stunning when a tiny nugget of truth falls out of the corner of their mouths when they think you're not looking, isn't it? Kinda like Reverse Tourrettes.
Let's get real for a moment, the position jockeying by both parties on all of this is being played out for political reasons - not for the betterment of either the Iraqi people or U.S. soldiers. Both parties are playing for 2008.
And yet again, Bush has outmaneauvered the Dems. Tonight he'll offer them a taste of exactly what they've been clamoring for in Iraq - a troop withdrawal and redeployment. Just as he done so many times before, after critics had battered his door for month after month on issue after issue - right as their hands start to bleed and they take a moment to bandage themselves, Bush shoves what they've been screaming for out the back-door and claims it was his own idea all along.
Brilliant like a Dumb-Fox he is.
We clamored for Rumseld to resign or be fired for years. And then suddenly - POOF - he's gone. We wanted Gonzales out on his ear. Now he's twitching at the bottom of the stairs Bush threw him down. We wanted Karl Rove's head on a stick like Jeff Dunham's Jalapeno. Now he's auditioning for his new gig as checkout guy for Chipotle.
And still Bush manages to make it seem like Democrats had nothing to do with it? Amazing.
We wanted our troops out of Iraq and suddenly Bush after the "smashing success of the surge" decides to play "uniter" give us what just we wanted - kinda.
It doesn't matter that the troops have to come home anyway since their deployments (which were pushed up from 12 months to 15 months for the surge) are going to run out in April. Never mind the fact that in order to reach June as the President plans to state, he'll have to further extend some of those deployments from 15 to 18 months. Let's not let any factiness get in the way of the gingoism and hero worship for Commander-Guy in Chief, ok? He's gonna talkify to the nation, just sit down and shutup like good little children...
The problem for Democrats is that Bush did this sick Kabuki Dance with the lives of our troops simply to provide political cover for the 7-8 hold-out Republicans in the Senate (not to mention the handful in the House) that can still help sustain a Presidential Veto against any more agressive withdrawal, redeployment or timetable measures from Democrats. As long as those Republicans hold their ground here's nothing Democrats can reasonably do about it.
Yes, yes I know it's been said that they can simply re-submit a Vetoed Bill, but according to the Senate Reference Guide on Veto Procedure (PDF) they can't.
If two-thirds of the Members of the chamber of origin do not agree to override a veto, then the measure dies and the other chamber does not have an opportunity to vote on the question of repassing the bill.
A dead measure can not be reconsidered for a vote, any vote. (Footnote: Except that in the Senate a failed Veto Override can be reconsidered, but the only reason to do that is if you think you might win the Veto Override the second time - which we won't, yet - so why bother?) Despite what Dennis Kucinich and John Edwards have said, you can't simply "send the measure back to the President" again and again. Not without revising it and sending it back through it's original sub-committees, committees, full votes in both chambers, conference committe and second full vote on both houses post conference. This all takes weeks, meanwhile the clock is always ticking on the current appropriations.
The Ultimate Solution that many have suggested, that Dems simply refuse to send the President a measure that he'll only Veto isn't viable. Gingrich tried it on Clinton and although he managed to shutdown the entire government - twice - it didn't work. Because those Dems were able to sustain his Vetos it was Clinton who had his way, not Gingrich.
Yes, I know that a total defense appropriations shutdown - and that is exactly what we're talking about - won't neccesarily mean that the troops will be walking around in loin cloths, but it does mean that all of their logistical support and all of the government contractors who are providing them food and other supplies won't be getting paid. Some - would probably stand down. It would put our troops at risk and it simply a horrid hobson's choice.
"Save the Troops by (Temporarily) Screwing the Troops anyone?"
Hmm... I just don't think that idea is Veto Proof.
Now after cranking up our Troop Level in Iraq and managing to achieve just 3 out of 18 of the goals attempted (which is pretty much an "F" in any class I've ever been in) Bush now says our troops have "done good" and some of them can now come home. His grand Run-Out-The-Clock til 2009 plan is working to perfection.
(Rubbing hands together like Montgomery Burns) "Excellent!"
Yet that still leaves at least another 100,000 U.S. Troops still in country, caught between a set of Sunni Insurgent and Shia Death Squad Rocks and an AQI Hard Place.
Democratic options on Iraq now are a choice between awful and horrific. They don't control foreign policy, the President does, and he can't force the corrupt and dysfunctional Iraqi Parliment to implement complex and difficult legislation any more than it would be reasonable to expect that any foreign nation would be able to force our (relatively) corrupt and dysfuctional congress to adopt some specific legislation to their liking. I mean, it's not like we haven't completley blown-off China over possible trade sanctions, cause they just might threaten to pull all their money out of the country or anything.
Yeah, right - like something like taking a tough and serious diplomatic stance could ever work. Puh-leeze.
Even if the fragile peace in Anbar manages to hold, what does this bode for the rest of the country? Do we begin to actively undermine the prop shell vichy Malaki government we ourselves set in place by continuing to offer de-facto amnesty to other warlords who happen to be willing to do our dirty work for us and exterminate al Qeada the way Sattar did?
How likely would these islamic gang-bangers - now with U.S. backing, support money and weapons they don't even have to even bother to steal from us anymore - be to simply declare their rivals to be "al Qeada" and attack them (as Sattar reportedly did) in order to help consolidate their own powerbase?
Wouldn't the Crips and Bloods like to have a piece of some action like that? "What's that Mr. Officer - You want me to take this gun and shoot that "al Qeada guy" over there for you? Yessir Massah - I'll get right on that."
Exactly which lame horse should we be backing in this pack of nags?
At this point Dems may only be able to play around in the margins, they may be able to ensure that our troops who are being held hostage by this President still have adequate food, water and gear during their continued and extended captivity in Iraq. They might be able to accelerate the De-Surge by implementing some hard-limits on the length of troop deployments and extend rest periods at home as Senator Webb has attempted. They might be able to even bring things down to below pre-surge levels in June as Nancy Pelosi has already begun to demand.
But even if they do all that, we're still going to have far too many troops in Iraq to have them all completely pulled out by next November 2008. It's still going to be an issue for the next Presidential Election and the Next President.
A Democratic Congress, with a Republican President and Lock-Step Republican minority can only do so much. Repubs still have the filibuster and the Veto, so we need to turn our energies toward next election - toward the Next President and the Next Congress.
It's certain that that Congress will be Democratic, but will it be a Super-Majority able to break filibusters? It's certain that we will have a next President (Thank Vishnu), but will it be one of the crypt-keeper twins Giuliani and Thompson or someone who isn't willing to use the Constitution as toilet paper - y'know like a Democrat. Will it be Obama, Hillary, Edwards or God-in-heaven-dare-I-still-have-hope... Al Gore?
Stay tuned, baring zesty Impeachment goodness, this story continued next election cycle.
Vyan
No comments:
Post a Comment