Surreal

All things considered, I picked a hell of a weekend to take some time off. Just after using a training wheels metaphor in describing the new, as yet unnamed government in Iraq, George W. Bush managed to prove that training wheels aren't just for Iraqis anymore. Hell, what's next? The walking and chewing gum test? Will Scott McClellan make an announcement from the podium in the event of a successful walking and chewing event?

"The pResident is resting comfortably after moving in more or less forward for twelve paces. In addition, we counted four separate instances of his jaw moving in an up and down direction."

"Scott, was that four instances up and down, or four instances total?"

"We're not going to comment at this time."

Then we find out that Ahmed Chalabi seems to have the attitude of "why just lie about WMD when I can double dip and spy for Iran," although he categorically denies the spying charge. What's the old saying? Something about "how can you tell when a politician is lying..."

And you've gotta love this line in the Post story:

Chalabi is not wanted for a crime, although the government in Jordan, where he was convicted in absentia of embezzling bank funds, reiterated yesterday that a jail cell awaits him.

I guess that's their way of handling the whole chickenshit into chicken salad thing. No, Chalabi isn't WANTED for a crime--becuase he's been CONVICTED of one.

Also doing the river in Egypt dance is General Ricardo Sanchez. The lawyer for one of the accused soldiers is publically saying said soldier will testify that Sanchez was present for some of the "interrogations."

The river in Egypt keeps on flowing--the US claims the wedding party they fired upon in western Iraq was no wedding. Unfortunately, videos have surfaced, and they suggest that, indeed, it was a marriage and not a gathering of militants. Well, who are you going to believe: the US Military or your own lying eyes?

Oh yeah--Bush will be speaking to the nation this evening--well, the part of the nation that watches C-Span or the all news channels--about Iraq. Let's see: I'm guessing the theme will be something like "Saddam bad, US good, so sorry about the Abu Ghraib Ass, stay the course, have faith, blah, blah, blah." In other words: River in Egypt--yet again.

On the same subject, the Green Zone is still green, but the border region is at the very least a flashing yellow, if not bright red.

Right Hand Thief sums it all up pretty nicely, so I'll give him the last word:

Recent polls indicate most Iraqis want us to leave, two thirds (!)support boogeyman Muqtada al-Sadr, and the overwhelming majority see U.S. troops as occupiers rather than liberators.

Currently we're bombing two of the holiest cities in Shia Islam, while the man we envisaged as Iraq's first president is functioning as an Iranian spy. Perhaps you remember widely ridiculed weapons inspector Scott Ritter's quote at the start of the conflict (since which he is up 180,000 credits at Punditbook):

Every time we confront Iraqi troops we may win some tactical battles, as we did for ten years in Vietnam, but we will not be able to win this war, which in my opinion is already lost.

Tomorrow at the Army War College the President will explain how well things are going in Iraq. Did someone brief him on the report published by the College's Strategic Studies group, describing the invasion as a "strategic error"? .

The United States is going to win every military battle in Iraq and lose the political war. To put it in simple terms for right-wing friends who relish "clarity":


Either you're for world historic strategic blunders or you're against them.