More Troops? Less Troops? Doesn't Matter

All the politico's are discussing "options" in Iraq.
If we send in more troops there will be more targets for the insugents.
What does bushco propose to do, divide up Iraq into 10 ft/sq. sections and stick a couple of soldiers in each segment?
Conditions in Iraq on the ground is going to trump anything bushco can come up with. Or anything anyone can come up with.
When jr invaded Iraq, killing thousands of people, he disbanded the police, the army, fired all public-sector workers (which included doctors, judges and teachers) and looted their banks.
And now we're "surprized" by and/or unprepared to deal with the civil war going on, and blaming the people of Iraq for the breakdown of law and order.

The U.S. puppet gov't has become a farce. They held a "National Reconciliation" meeting last week and the key players didn't even bother to show up.

And of course the person to blame for all of this is jr.
As spokesperson for bushco, he bears the blame for all the appaling suffering going on in Iraq, and should be help accountable in the form of an International War Crimes tribunal ala Nurenburg, as well as his fellow henchman: deadeye dick, rummey, gozales & connie.

I condem Pelosi for refusing to "entertain the idea of sanctions" (censure/impeachment) against jr., indicating she's already cut a backroom deal with bushco. I hope conditions on the ground here at home trump her decision and forces Congress to bow to the will of the people.

 

To what end are you going to try to impeach Bush? It requires a 2/3rds majority in the Senate, which Pelosi doesn't have.

Correct me if I'm worng.

 

She may not have it NOW, but every few days I see another former warhawk admitting they've been wrong.
A lot of dem. voters and lawmakers are still pissed off about the House impeaching Bill for the crime of getting a blowjob. And many republicans are pissed about the extreme loss of life and increased misery that little sack of shit babybush has caused.
We've got elections coming up in less than 2 years. If the U.S. still has a huge # of troops on the ground at that time, the republicans will suffer losses that will make their recent losses look like a walk in the park.

 

Just more targets for the resistence.

Or.. a Kind of psycological game..

Any how..No one takes their word for real consideration...

 

america will return to its pre war battle lines and conduct daily bombing runs on iraq
or attack iran and declare war on all of its enemies

 

fewer troops.

 

How about NO troops?

The US is going around the world and fucking it up, and then saying that if we wtihdraw our troops things are going to just get worse, when we're the ones that fucked things up in the first place. I don't know why it's so hard for so many dumb-assed people to see that.

 

We will definitely see troop buildups. The Bush administration already has it in the works and with Sadaams' execution there will be increased hostilities so the need will appear to be a foregone conclusion.

 

This is a bizarre event. Insurgents pass through 3 checkpoints and open fire within a compound.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/22/iraq.karbala/index.html

Excerpts:

"KARBALA, Iraq (CNN) -- Attackers who killed five U.S. troops at a government building in Karbala posed as U.S. military officials to get past Iraqi guards, a Karbala police spokesman said.

The attackers went through three checkpoints to enter the center, he said.

The first U.S. casualty in the attack was a soldier sitting in a Humvee outside a meeting of U.S. and Iraqi security officials.

The assailants targeted only U.S. soldiers, al-Mishawi said, adding that not a single Iraqi soldier or police officer was killed."

.