Disclosure: I worked for the Lamont campaign doing web design and production and some writing for the official blog (from 9/5/06 to 11/07/06).

Tuesday, September 12, 2006


Sen. Lieberman Silent While Iraq Goes Down The Tubes

OK, forget Sen. Lieberman's missed votes, cheerleading for Bush ("bottom line," Joe thought he had it right), demonizing of Democrats as Al-Qaeda enablers, acceptance of financial support from architects of Bush's war (Bill Kristol) and managers of Bush's post-war policy (Dan Senor), and the all-around and complete lack of any serious calls for accountability from this administration.

Do what Sen. Lieberman wants you to do, think about "good stuff," and forget his failures for the moment.

Sen. Lieberman now says "as a policy maker and elected leader, I am focused on the fact that al-Qaida is there now."

As a policy maker and elected leader, what does he plan to do about this report from the Marines? Anything?

The political and security situation in western Iraq is grim and will continue to deteriorate unless the region receives a major infusion of aid and a division is sent to reinforce the American troops operating there, according to the senior Marine intelligence officer in Iraq.

The assessment, prepared last month by Col. Peter Devlin at the Marine headquarters in Anbar Province, has been sent to senior military officials in Iraq and at the Pentagon....

Without the deployment of an additional division, “there is nothing MNF-W can do to influence the motivation of the Sunni to wage an insurgency,” the report states, according to a military officer familiar with it. MNF-W stands for Multinational Force-West, the formal name of the Marine command. A division numbers about 16,000 troops. The limited number of troops, however, is just one problem in countering the insurgency there, the report says. The assessment describes Anbar as a region marked by violence and criminality. Except for a few relatively bright spots, like the towns of Falluja and Qaim, the region generally lacks functional governments and a respect for the rule of law.

So should we send in another division? The Marines are saying we can't stay the course.

Meanwhile, Michael Ware reports that privately, military commanders are saying we don't just need another division, but three times as many troops in order to maintain order in Western Iraq:


In Ramadi, in western Al Anbar province, we see what can only be described as a black hole in President Bush's global war on terror. As the president is going through his series of speeches to reassure the American people and to inform them about the success and the progress of his war on terror, there in Al Anbar we saw that al Qaeda at its very heart has been found, identified, yet is not being struck at....

WARE: ...Privately, off line, what commanders, again, from Baghdad to Ramadi, will tell you is that they need at least three times as many troops as they currently have there now, be that Iraqi and American or, even better, just three times as many as American troops. I mean, there's an area there north of the Euphrates River that is used by al Qaeda's top leadership that Osama bin Laden himself points to. It's the size of New Hampshire.

This is the same Michael Ware, former Baghdad Bureau Chief for Time Magazine, who said of Sen. Lieberman's policy last December that:

"I and some other journalists had lunch with Senator Joe Lieberman the other day and we listened to him talking about Iraq. Either Senator Lieberman is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line. Because one of my colleagues turned to me in the middle of this lunch and said he's not talking about any country I've ever been to and yet he was talking about Iraq, the very country where we were sitting."

So what is Sen. Lieberman's plan? Regardless of whatever rhetoric Dan Gerstein and Sen. Lieberman come up with for his speech planned for this week, it's obvious that not much has changed since then.

Plot still lost. Falied policies still being supported.
When does Senator Lieberman expect the on-the-ground situation to get better? That's my question for Gung-ho Joe.

Of course he and Bush can't answer it, b/c the utopian neo-con dreamers haven't a clue.

Meanwhile more and more of our soldiers die in the Iraq experiment. Some politician needs to lose their job over this. One, if not all of them.
Who Wants A Senator That Won’t Even Vote on Iraq?

What more needs to be said about a Senator that refuses to vote on the most important issue of our time? That’s just like having no Senator at all. Lieberman is much worse than an empty suit. He’s an empty seat.

18 years ago Weicker’s refusal to cast votes on important issues was a central rationale for his replacement in the first Lieberman Senate campaign. It’s only fair that the same rules should apply now.
Post a Comment

<< Home