...handled incompetently, one thing the Bush administration has proven is that he and his administration will be sure to do so. They are truly
not just corrupt, but also one of the most incompetent bunch of buffoons ever allowed to mishandle this nation's foreign affairs.

heh--no point in posting my take from Orange since you covered my points so well.....

great minds, right Booman?

My Three Cents - 50% more opinion for free

Can we agree he needs to removed from office yet?

I'm okay iwth that --- and the sooner the better!

If you want things to get better, be prepared to deal with change.

After reading Cole during lunch, my sunny disposition has about disappeared. This is grim in ways we can't think of in this country.

I'd expect, after the debacle of the museum in Baghdad, that the administration would have sat down and listed the places that absolutely had to be guarded from attack, desecration, destruction, etc - and I don't mean the oil-related facilities!  Given that Bush and Cheney probably couldn't list any such places in this country that they give a flying leap about, were they found to have oil or other exploitable resources in them, they obviously didn't think about this, nor have any underling think in this way, either. Or at least not successfully.

The small snarkmonster whispering in my ear says it's a wonder that blowing up the moon wasn't part of the plan as a way to obliterate the crescent moon image from the view of the infidels.

"What I want to hear from you is how we're going to win," he quoted the president as warning his commanders, "not how we're going to leave."

This is the kind of statement that I expect from my 8 year old.  Winning and losing, a black and white view of the world.  To him (and my 8 year old), there is no room for gray areas.  The days of westerns with black hats/white hats are over, and have been for some time.    

Oh, there you are, Perry. -Phineas -SLB-

Your analogy seems rather ahistoric, Boo. I suppose it would be closer to imagine somebody blowing a hole in the most important Russian Orthodox cathedral and parading statues of Stalin or Lenin. Or defacing the Vietnam memorial in DC with images of Ho Chi Minh.

Aside from that, I think the execution and the manner of it managed to blow off the last small chance for some begining of reconciliation in Iraq. We and our puppets have managed to turn an anti-Islamist, secularist, dictator into an Islamist martyr. Just amazing. Can it really be incompetence at that level, or are we completely misreading the true intentions of the neocons?

I have to wonder what would have happened if the Iraqi "government" had insisted that the trial continue so that the Kurdish massacre could be examined, and at the real end tried to bring Iraqis together by acknowledging that all factions -- Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds and more-- had been betrayed and violated by Saddam's regime. That the death of Saddam could never begin to expiate his crimes, but would simply feed the cycle of violence. "The evil we have all endured now lies uncovered before Iraq and the world. Let the killing stop here and now as we turn together to rebuild a free and prosperous nation from the ashes we have inherited."

Probably wouldn't have made any difference, but it sure wouldn't have been a recipe for further, final, damage the way the hasty execution will be.

I've been surprised at the relative lack of triumphalism in the US reaction to the killing of Saddam. Even the Chicago Tribune had a big front page head to the effect of "Was Justice Too Hasty?". There seems to be a sense of revulsion and letdown here and around the world, including Iraq. Whatever this judicial murder was supposed to accomplish turned out to be, like all of Bush's efforts, a net loss for peace, for justice, for Iraq, for America.

FDR's response to progressive demands: "I agree. Now go out and make me do it."

BooMan, can you be more explicit about your conspiracy theory?  Even from an a priori perspective, I don't see any potential short-term gain.  Are you thinking that the shrine bombing might have united an otherwise fractious Shiite constituency, and caused them to increase their support for the nascent government?  I just absolutely don't see this, even if I try to place myself inside the dangerously limited thinking of the bad actors in the US administration.  

There can be no doubt that the CIA has supported terrorist activities in the world, and will do so in the future.  This is horrible and represensible.  But terrorism is destabilizing and can only be a means to increasing violence, not decreasing it.  If the Russian government supported the apartment bombings, it was in order to garner support for escalating violence in Chechnya.  In Iraq, US interests in early 2006 were clearly aligned with decreasing violence, not increasing it.

Apologies if I am misreading -- if so, please do clarify.  Thanks.

but we can see that the mid-term results have been catastrophic.

So that would mean another "mission Accomplished."

Do we really still think that GW's gang, and the CIA and all and any other players really wants there to be a peaceful solution or outcome to all of this?

The Neo-con puppeteers have intended from the beginning for this to be the "Long War" without end.  They want forever control of the oil resources in the Middle East and they do not care how they get it.  We were supposed to build those 20-30 permanent military bases and have everyone cheering us on for our eternal occupation.

They have no conscience and they don't care how they gain control of things. . .I just do think that they had hoped to position the UN to support us and demand that we stay there to keep things "under control."  My tin-foil hat gets bigger every day. . .

don't miss ~ Matters of Spirit and Expanded Views

Yes, it's another end-times delusion, complete with war and Jesus:

The Mahdi, according to majority Sunni and Shi'ite tradition, will arise at some point before the day of judgement, institute a kingdom of justice, and will in the last days fight alongside the returned Islamic prophet Jesus....
Before his coming, a third of the world will die in a war, another third will die in famine and sickness caused by this great war and only a third will survive.

Wikipedia: Mahdi

Apparently, this idea is embedded in both Shia and Sunni beliefs. Note the name of the "Mahdi Army" created by Muqtada al-Sadr. Meanwhile, in Iran:

The most remarkable aspect of Mr Ahmadinejad's piety is his devotion to the Hidden Imam, the Messiah-like figure of Shia Islam [i.e., the Mahdi], and the president's belief that his government must prepare the country for his return.

Daily Telegraph: 'Divine mission' driving Iran's new leader

Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.