Posts Made By: Rod Kaufman

General Thomas Metz was asked about the average of 70 attacks per day in Iraq. He responded that the average was misleading because not all attacks are successful. A failed attack on a military convoy is counted on the same day as a bombing that kills or maims scores of people. In his view, the non-lethal/non casulty producing event does not and should not add up.
I beg to differ wth that assessment. I don't believe it's pessimistic to do so. I believe it's realistic to do so.
Is not the main issue here SECURITY in Iraq?
For example, the principal reason the Sunni minority representative party pulled out of the elections last week is due to lack of security in Iraq according to their spokesman. Many of the most vocal supporters of the Bush policies in Iraq acknowledge that an election without significant Sunni representation is no election at all.
When an attack occurs at the rate of 70 per day,it's an attack that compromises the security of Iraq and whether or not an attack is successful or not is not the issue. It's comparable to saying it became necessary to destroy a village(or an Iraqi town) in order to save it.

Brent Scowcroft, former national security advisor to Bush senior, said the election in Iraq could further inflame the conflict and increase the risk of civil war. Rather than leading to stability, Scowcroft said, he fears the election will further alienate the Sunni Muslim population and "has great potential for deepening the conflict."
"Indeed, we may be seeing an incipient civil war at the present time."
His comments marked one of the most ominous assessments about the implications of the upcoming election from a high ranking former official, according to the LA Times.
Scowcroft is also the mentor and recruiter of Condoleezza Rice, Bush's choice as the next secretary of state so it appears his comments are especially relevant...

President Bush, ever the eager-beaver optimist, held an event at the oval office on Friday that occurs with about the same frequency as a total eclipse of the sun: he answered the questions of reporters.
President Bush rejected the warnings of Brent Scowcroft who argued a day earlier that the election in Iraq will inflame the conflict rather than lead to stability because it will further alienate the Sunni Muslim population.
The president proudly proclaimed," the election would be an incredibly hopeful experience for the Iraqi people."
Asked whether he shared Scowcroft's concerns, Bush told reportes, "Quite the opposite."
Mr Bush went on to say, "We're making great progress."
However, on Thursday, Lt General Thomas F Metz, top operational commander in Iraq, said conditions in significant areas of four major provinces in Iraq were too unstable for voting.
Whom to believe?...

Jim, with the way it's going under the Bush administration, you won't have to worry about the bears showing up at all...

Although the death rate of the American grizzly bear is at a 15 year high, the Bush administration is pushing for removal of the bear from the endangered species list.
According to the LA Times, "The administration wants to modify the Endangered Species Act to make it harder to add to the list and easier to remove species from it." "It also wants to make it harder to set aside critical wildlife habitat-wildlife sanctuaries covering millions of acres where commercial and industrial development is restricted."
Incredibly, Republican commissioners have declared the bears, " socially unacceptable."
Basically it appears to me that developers, driven by their usual motivations of greed and profiteering, are staking out their claims in areas inhabited by the grizzly and the Bush administration is accomodating their whims with the potential outcome of the extinction of the species.
It may come to be that the only grizzly you will see will be the one in a picture hanging on one of Dubya's walls...

It appears one has to start planning for the 2008 elections even though we just finished one.
Michael Moore has suggested the democrats take a cue from the republicans and nominate an actor for the top spot. After the successes of Reagan and the draft an amendment to change the constitution to allow Arnold to run for the presidency movement, the idea does not seem far-fetched.
Moore's choice for the top spot? Tom Hanks.
His reasoning: who would not vote for Tom Hanks? And his political leanings evidently please the democrats.
Whether or not Tom Hanks has any desire to run is unknown to me, but Moore has a point...

Barbra Walters "powder puff" interview with Bush was a sight to behold. As our president struggled to articulate a structured sentence, Ms Walters proceeded to ask Laura Bush about our involvement in Iraq. In particular, Mrs Bush was asked if our involvement was justified even though weapons of mass destruction do not exist in Iraq. Incredibly, Mrs Bush responded September 11 justified our involvement in Iraq. Unfortunately, Ms Walters did not pursue the fact that Bin Laden directed the attack without any involvement of SH or Iraq.
In what appeared to be the typical Bush-mandated pre-arranged scripted interview, Barbra Walters asked if the Bush's were excited about the "democracies" in Afghanistan, the PLO, and Iraq. Since when are these areas democracies? Of course the Bush's were elated in describing them as such.
Mr Bush appeared as if he were one of those bobbing head dolls with an attached smily face and grunted one or two word answers with an occasional statement of a questionable fact.
What a joke...

The CNN website is reporting an article by New Yorker magazine journalist Seymour Hersh on planning by Rumsfeld, Chenney, Wolfowitz and Bush for military operations in as many as TEN nations.
The current choice for both covert and overt operations is Iran where the neocons believe their "mandate" from the american people is to root-out terrorism in that country as well as nine others. The neocons believe US led strikes will bring about an uprising against the current rulers in Iran and opinions contrary to this view are not allowed to be discussed!
Is this madness or what?

The Bush administration is trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat by actively recruiting Iraqis living in the states in order to vote via absentee ballot in the upcoming election. At present, the administration has signed up 30,000 in Irvine, California and 100,000 in Detroit and is scouring the country for more.
The Iraqis, many of whom have not been in Iraq for decades, are lining up to vote and one representative Iraqi told a KNX news reporter, "I don't know anything about the candidates or their issues or positions." Hmm, sounds like a typical Bush voter!
Join the delusion, sign-up a local Iraqi today!

France, as noted on CNN, is willing to have an alliance with the US but not a policy of "submission". Good luck trying that with Bush at the helm especially with Ms Rice as Lady Diplomacy.
Bush stated he would try to unite us when asked to do so by Kerry in the concession phone-call.
Bush had a golden opportunity to try to do so in a nationally televised interview with Barbra Walters. The thought never crossed his mind. His theme of the festivities is "spreading freedom". What about bringing us together? If not then, when?
If Bush can't even acknowledge the problem, how can he fix it?
So if he does not attempt to reconcile with 50% of America, what chance does France have?