WARNING: Stormy Waters Ahead. Proceed with Caution.
Remember when the three Democratic frontrunners all refused to commit to withdrawing all troops from Iraq by the end of their first term? A lot of folks in the blogosphere were outraged by that, saying that the Democrats really didn't want to end the war, that they were as bad as Bush, blah blah freaking blah.
My reaction was: Of COURSE they can't commit to it, because they don't know what horrible surprises will await them once they finally get the evil monkey out of his feces-stained squat in the Oval Office.
And lo, last Sunday it was revealed unto the nation by Newsweek's Michael Hirsh that the Chimp-in-Chief has a very, very nasty surprise planned indeed. Not content to smear his shit all over Iraq for the past five years, he wants to make sure the stench can't be removed for a long, long time - not even by President [fill in the Democrat] in 2009.
Mr. Hirsh goes on to say that under the proposed accords, troop levels will be drawn down to around 60,000 by the end of 2008. Well, at least that would be an improvement, right? Of course, that number does not include Blackwater and other mercenary groups; and of course, we would be required to have (say it with me now) PERMANENT MILITARY BASES IN IRAQ. Wheeee!!! Can't you just see Cheney gloating in his bunker, his fat slug body rolling naked in $1,000 bills? Ohhhhh, the humanity!
No wonder KKKarl was claiming that Iraq will not be an issue in the 2008 election. This horrifying scheme has his drool all over it. If permanent military bases are in these accords, and the next President is obligated to continue the occupation forevah, then what can be done to get us out of Iraq?
FUCK! What in the name of the Giant Green Lizard is it going to take to make Nancy Pelosi realize that the only way to bring our troops home is to impeach Cheney and Bush NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW?!?!?!?!?! What the hell does she think we've been screaming about for the past year? Not just stopping the invasion of Iran, but also finally extricating ourselves from the bloody morass in Iraq, depends on it. GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD, MADAME SPEAKER, AND DO SOMETHING NOW!!!!
Calmer Waters Ahead Now. Safe for Delicate Stomachs.
All right, now that I've blown off some steam...it's time for a little optimism. Unlike Mr. Hirsh, who seems absolutely delighted by these revoltin' developments, I'm not convinced that an agreement based on an illegal occupation truly can be considered binding. And tell me, which "Iraqi government" will approve the accords? Surely even the Deciderer knows that the existing coalition of the unwilling is far from unified. By 2009, an entirely new structure or majority could be in place; one that, like most Iraqis, wants us the hell out of there.
Despite the eventual outcome of this scheme, it remains a truly Machiavellian and disgusting way of using our troops to shield the Deciderer from the consequences of his actions.
Tragically for our nation, our soldiers, and the Iraqis suffering under the brutal yoke of a hostile occupying force, that's just the way Bush and Cheney do business.
Worst. Co-Presidents. EVER.
Remember when the three Democratic frontrunners all refused to commit to withdrawing all troops from Iraq by the end of their first term? A lot of folks in the blogosphere were outraged by that, saying that the Democrats really didn't want to end the war, that they were as bad as Bush, blah blah freaking blah.
My reaction was: Of COURSE they can't commit to it, because they don't know what horrible surprises will await them once they finally get the evil monkey out of his feces-stained squat in the Oval Office.
And lo, last Sunday it was revealed unto the nation by Newsweek's Michael Hirsh that the Chimp-in-Chief has a very, very nasty surprise planned indeed. Not content to smear his shit all over Iraq for the past five years, he wants to make sure the stench can't be removed for a long, long time - not even by President [fill in the Democrat] in 2009.
In remarks to the traveling press, delivered from the Third Army operation command center here, Bush said that negotiations were about to begin on a long-term strategic partnership with the Iraqi government modeled on the accords the United States has with Kuwait and many other countries.
[snip]
Most significant of all, the new partnership deal with Iraq, including a status of forces agreement that would then replace the existing Security Council mandate authorizing the presence of the U.S.-led multinational forces in Iraq, will become a sworn obligation for the next president. It will become just another piece of the complex global security framework involving a hundred or so countries with which Washington now has bilateral defense or security cooperation agreements. Last month, Sen. Hillary Clinton urged Bush not to commit to any such agreement without congressional approval. The president said nothing about that on Saturday, but Lute said last fall that the Iraqi agreement would not likely rise to the level of a formal treaty requiring Senate ratification. Even so, it would be difficult if not impossible for future presidents to unilaterally breach such a pact. [emphasis added]
Mr. Hirsh goes on to say that under the proposed accords, troop levels will be drawn down to around 60,000 by the end of 2008. Well, at least that would be an improvement, right? Of course, that number does not include Blackwater and other mercenary groups; and of course, we would be required to have (say it with me now) PERMANENT MILITARY BASES IN IRAQ. Wheeee!!! Can't you just see Cheney gloating in his bunker, his fat slug body rolling naked in $1,000 bills? Ohhhhh, the humanity!
No wonder KKKarl was claiming that Iraq will not be an issue in the 2008 election. This horrifying scheme has his drool all over it. If permanent military bases are in these accords, and the next President is obligated to continue the occupation forevah, then what can be done to get us out of Iraq?
FUCK! What in the name of the Giant Green Lizard is it going to take to make Nancy Pelosi realize that the only way to bring our troops home is to impeach Cheney and Bush NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW?!?!?!?!?! What the hell does she think we've been screaming about for the past year? Not just stopping the invasion of Iran, but also finally extricating ourselves from the bloody morass in Iraq, depends on it. GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD, MADAME SPEAKER, AND DO SOMETHING NOW!!!!
Calmer Waters Ahead Now. Safe for Delicate Stomachs.
All right, now that I've blown off some steam...it's time for a little optimism. Unlike Mr. Hirsh, who seems absolutely delighted by these revoltin' developments, I'm not convinced that an agreement based on an illegal occupation truly can be considered binding. And tell me, which "Iraqi government" will approve the accords? Surely even the Deciderer knows that the existing coalition of the unwilling is far from unified. By 2009, an entirely new structure or majority could be in place; one that, like most Iraqis, wants us the hell out of there.
Despite the eventual outcome of this scheme, it remains a truly Machiavellian and disgusting way of using our troops to shield the Deciderer from the consequences of his actions.
Tragically for our nation, our soldiers, and the Iraqis suffering under the brutal yoke of a hostile occupying force, that's just the way Bush and Cheney do business.
Worst. Co-Presidents. EVER.
2 comments:
With Bush, it's like our military might is just a big fat ass he wants to plant all over the world!
yep - talk about an Ass of Evil!
Post a Comment