Just another day in the "war on terror"

Why doesn't this inspire any confidence in me? A couple of days ago, nobody wanted a troop "surge" in Baghdad except Bush. Today the generals in Iraq say, oh wait a minute, maybe we really do want a few thousand more guys. We'll think of something for them to do. I'm sure there was no pressure from the White House for them to accept this one last, "last push," one more time, to attempt to salvage some semblence of meaning from this ill-fated occupation.

Easy for them to gamble with 20,000 or so soldier's lives. And if it doesn't work, we'll be even worse off than before the "surge" but maybe this will finally shut up the warmongers who can't accept a defeat when it's kicking them in the kneecaps. But probably it won't. They'll be pushing for one more last push until the day our incompetent excuse for a Commander in Chief skulks out of office.

Meanwhile, we've killed the number three AQ guy -- again. Maybe. How many times have we done that now? It must be hard for Osama to fill that slot. Who would want to be number three when that's the guy that always gets killled?

And on a even brighter note, Condi assures us that the blood and money we've spent in Iraq has been "a good investment" because "because once it emerges as a country that is a stabilizing factor you will have a very different kind of Middle East.” She neglects to mention that emergence is expected to occur at about the same time hell freezes over.

What a cold fish. She speaks as though she's talking about pushing paper chits on Wall Street instead of gambling with living human beings who have children and families who love and need them and who will suffer for generations hence when the chits are called in to pay for this mess.