It will be the big business Republicans.

Or as we used to say, the "Eastern monied establishment".  Think you've called the correct gored ox this time.  

Given that the GOP no longer has a platform for any pushback I still am betting the Rep moderates pony up for a leap right over the Dems and draw up their own papers of Impeachment. Otherwise they have another Custer on their hands and the day after that last stand will be what we are left with.

.
the Iraq policy of Mr.  Bush will not change with VP Dick Cheney still in office!

NYT: "Through most of the Bush administration, the neoconservatives' idea of using American military power to advance democracy around the world prevailed, pushed along by Vice President Dick Cheney and Mr. Rumsfeld."

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

I think this is true. I think that some version of a complete fall-apart scenario is in progress now-- that Bush has been both warned and offered a lifeline by the Baker report.
 I'm expecting a Saigon moment in Iraq soon.  I don't see how Bush can forestall it.
The media monkeys who support him are themselves out there alone --
If they suddenly stopped spinning there would be no there there.  No opposition to pulling in the rug.
Only a loud silence.
And we have been told that Murtha speaks for the military. (That must mean some segments of the military.)  And Murtha speaks louder and clearer all the time.

syolles

The Brits are more than freaking out

A confidential report of "serious-tensions" splits open as wide as the Atlantic ocean that separates the two.

-The Independent UK, Sunday Edition

Go read:

Patrick Cockburn: The Americans don't see how unwelcome they are, or that Iraq is now beyond repair. The main purpose of Bush invading Iraq was to retain power at home.

and

British Military Chiefs say CIA is undermining British war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan

British intelligence officers and military commanders have accused the US of undermining British policies in Iraq and Afghanistan[.]

British sources have blamed pressure from the CIA for President Hamid Karzai's decision to dismiss Mohammed Daud as governor of Helmand, the southern province where Britain deployed some 4,000 troops this year. Governor Daud was appointed in mid-year to replace a man the British accused of involvement in opium trafficking, but on Thursday Mr Karzai summoned him to Kabul and sacked him, along with his deputy.

"The Americans knew Daud was a main British ally," one official told The Independent on Sunday, "yet they deliberately undermined him and told Karzai to sack him." The official said the Defence Secretary, Des Browne, was "tearing his hair out".[.]

[t]he situation in Iraq, seen by the IoS, has reported "serious tensions" in the American-British coalition. American commanders in the country are believed to oppose the British strategy for handing over Maysan and Basra provinces to Iraqi control as part of an exit strategy.[..]

That, as the Brits say, is a damning indictment. How happy is Blair? His defense secretary must be pulling more than just Blair's hair.


Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"

I don't understand why this isn't being pointed out more, but the ISG is STILL trying to privatize Iraq's oil reserves. Buried in the fine print of the ISG report is the demand that Iraq must fully privatize Iraq's oil reserves. It's a non-negotiable point. The ISG report even says it's a non-negotiable point.

There's been no chance in the REAL target of the Iraqi invasion. Iraqi oil fields. Baker is a "realist," I suppose. He's dressing the true goal up behind a fat wall of diplomatese and faux bipartisanship instead of partisan dogma, but the true goals of the US invasion of Iraq hasn't change one damn bit. The ISG demanded Iraq oil industry control be centralized in Baghdad. No portion of the Iraqi oil wealth are to be fractioned out to any of the factions fighting one another. That oil is to be handed over to the multinational oil companies. The only difference is Baker is willing to let international diplomacy succeed at stealing all Iraq's oil wealth where Bush's bumbling military failed.

"...Dammit, whatever happened to the concept of accountability for catastrophic failure?..." -Al Gore

and George continues to fiddle while Bagdad burns.

Frodo failed...Bush has got the ring.

The best way to further the divisions between moderate Republicans and the wingnuts is to concentrate on the neocon ideology of US dominance in the Middle East that drove the invasion.  Make the moderates choose between endorsing the neocon ideology or not.  There is no other reason to support the war.  This will effectively turn Iraq into a wedge issue: dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.

This will require de-linking Iraq from the GWOT.  Iraq is not a threat to the US and never has been.  If you want to fight terrorists, then lets fight terrorists, and not the Iraqi's.

If Dems play it like that, they will be able to force withdrawal weather the president likes it or not.


If we don't defend our allies and their issues, who will defend us and ours?

Where can we find this mythical creature you speak of?  Have you noticed our national debt lately?  The supposedly sane, pro-business Republicans have been revealed as charlatans.  They only care about personal wealth and profit, not the good of the country.  I assume they will kill stupid crap like this 80 percent solution that Cheney supports, because alienating Sunnis worldwide is bad for business, but there is a long way from that to supporting impeachment.

You may be right, but I will believe that the current batch of Republicans would even think of impeaching one of their own only when it begins to happen.  Most of the so-called "moderate" Republicans lost last month.  Mitch McConnell and Orrin Hatch are going to support impeachment because it's good for the country?  Yeah, right.  Tell me another fairy tale.

I think you are overly optimistic. The gentility of this country have never demonstrated a willingness to act against one of their own. They may speak out, they may pressure, but I have never seen action.

There seems to be a strong belief in the right of a powerful person to make their own mistakes. We are the inheritors of Rome, after all, and Bush is very much a Nero-type. Nero was allowed to govern and govern and govern, no matter how bad it got.

For that matter, in this case, I don't think that even if Poppy Bush's people tried to take down Shrub that they could. I think that the FOX/Murdoch/Limbaugh power bloc wouldn't listen and I don't think the Dems have the chops to push the right way to make the change.

We're very much up shit creek now. This will probably play out slow and gruesome. The real nasty point will be when a Dem gets elected in 08 (if it happens) and then doesn't withdraw. Because they might not. It's a nasty world and nasty people have a lot of power.

The more control, the more that requires control. This is the road to chaos. -Frank Herbert, The Dosadi Experiment

Hear, hear!  Congrats on the link from Huff Po on this diary; a worthy choice.

Oops; meant Raw Story. I have graduate student finals brain fog.  Keep it up--you're feeding me the essentials!