Middle Class Populist

The violence spreads in Iraq. Innocent kids are killed playing soccer.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2276169&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Meanwhile the nice Shia Folks demonstrate support for Hezbollah and burn our flag.

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/topstories_story_216213828.html

Donald Rumsfeld meanwhile tells the Senate that we are pursuing a policy of “balance” between over saturating Iraq with troops to do the job vs. creating an atmosphere where we are perceived as “occupying their country”. HELLO we are occupying their country so lets either get the God Damn job over with using the right amount of resources or GET THE HELL OUT!

Rumsfeld appears so desperate that he wants to sound “politically correct” and not use a nasty no no word like “occupation”. Hey if “occupation” was good enough for Germany after World War II then “occupation” is good enough for a third world county. The issue is should we have gone to war with Iraq to begin with and if so should we have stayed after we found no WMD?

Senator Mc Cain, while questioning “Rummy”, mentioned that we seem to be playing a game where one city goes up then we move to fix it followed by another. AGAIN let me point out the similarity or really the “Dissimilarity” between this “occupation” (that seems to be a bad word oh my) and the occupation of Germany at the end of World War II. Imagine the Nazis retaking Munich three years after the surrender! (see my broader analysis below of the current situation compared to the end of WWII)

http://rantingbaldhippie.com/blog1/2006/07/27/more-troops-for-iraq/

The problem is not the “balance”, as Rumsfeld mentioned, between having enough troops to get the job done vs. being seen as an occupation force (we are occupying Iraq). The balancing act is trying to reconcile the miscalculation of forces needed to occupy Iraq without requiring a reinstatement of the draft to maintain the occupation of Iraq plus fulfill our other military commitments around the world! We NEVER had the required amount of troops to do a successful “OCCUPATION” when surrounding nations can act as sources of unrest. Besides we let Iraqi’s maintain firearms after the surrender. To have the required amount of troops would have pushed us to the point of requiring a DRAFT or very close to it! Now if our National Security was at stake then so be it. But if we had saner war objectives after we found no WMD we would have installed a puppet government and then stationed a token force out in the desert leaving Iraq alone. We should have got THE HELL OUT! If we did our economy would be less in debt though the trade deficit with China is another issue.

Senators McCain and Clinton both took Rumsfeld to task. But no one still seems to understand that three years after WWII we did not have the situation we have now in Iraq. Excuse me but is “OCCUPATION” a bad word. Either do the “OCCUPATION” correctly or get the hell out. I think we should have installed a friendly General and gotten the hell out.

Why must we “water” the “social engineering experiment” of imposed democracy in Iraq with the blood of our brave troops? Who are we trying to impress in that corner of the world? No doubt the citidels of democracy such as:

· Saudi Arabia,

· United Arab Emirates

· Yemen

· Egypt

· and naturally the Sudan. You know the nice folks who massacre Christians in Darfur but no one seems to care about.

But I think the above Arab Citadels of Democracy would no doubt forgive us for not spreading democracy. Well I hope you see the point. So we are doing this “crusade” almost by ourselves and for what purpose? Meanwhile five years after 9-11 our borders are totally insecure! We will send the National Guard full time to Iraq but only send a few National Guard units to our border on two week rotations. Hey it takes a few days in transit each way. Oh yeah great commitment we have to national security and our borders and our President wanted to turn over our port operations to a U.A.E. corporation!

Let me say it again. Don’t be to hard on George Bush after all he doesn’t really understand the difference between having full time National Guard troops at the border as opposed to National Guard troops on annual summer duty for two weeks assisting at the border. But then again he cut and ran from his commitment to the National Guard when he was younger. But he will make sure your sons and daughters don’t cut and run.

Again I present the following issue.

QUESTION: What is similiar to Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and why?

ANSWER: George Bush’s service record in the National Guard. Like Iraqi WMD neither can be found!