4 Comments so far

1. panamahead March 15th, 2007 7:36 pm

   Best report on Iraq I’ve read in a while.

   VIPS should write one every week until our commander-in-thief understands that his as-long-as-I’m-the-dictator style of governing, simply won’t fly in Iraq, Iran or Syria.

   Besides, dying for Halliburton and Big Oil is not something every kid in America wants to do when he grows up.

   Big mistake, George. Listen to VIPS.

2. Poet March 16th, 2007 12:09 pm

   Thanks guys (and lady)for showing that opposing the Iraqi war need not be the exclusive province of wacky-doodle extremists but is entirely consistent with rational and doable policy that can start RIGHT NOW–if someone has but the will to do something rather than stand around wringing their hands over the mess.

3. Bill from Saginaw March 16th, 2007 2:44 pm

   Three cheers for VIPS. This is the sort of grown up analysis serious policy makers in Congress should consider first to frame the debate, and figure out the potential domestic political pitfalls and spin only at the end of the process.

   Until reading this piece, I was unaware that LBJ had been formally advised by the CIA that unleashing a bombing campaign would not have a significant impact upon defeating the Viet Cong insurgency threat to the Saigon regime, but Lyndon and Robert McNamara plowed on ahead with bombs away anyway. I’m relieved to know this bit of insider history, since I’ve always held the view that the CIA was a chief mover and shaker primarily responsible for pushing the military escalation of what started as a big covert black ops “advisory” mission, that morphed into full scale war and ultimately into virtual genocide before it ignominiously ended. While it’s still fundamentally accurate to see the Vietnam War as quintessential blow back upon monstrous scale, I will henceforth point my finger more at the Cold War ideological folly of the White House politicians than at the analysts of the national security establishment.

   VIPS also deserves a kudo for pointing out the subtle straw man political disparagement of the peace movement implicit in the NIE’s Chicken Little warning against “rapid withdrawal.” Which leads to the matter of remedy. I fully agree that Rep. Barbara Lee’s approach of tying funding to “safe and complete withdrawal” by a date certain is a solid legislative approach to a tough problem. Unfortunately, it appears to have exactly 50 votes in the Senate right now.

4. bnsyhahatiwy January 13th, 2008 4:15 pm

   titruwuwatosy…

   exzihicanawi…

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)