TWENTY YEARS

Kevin Drum and Matt Yglesias have already posted about this but the timeframe is so much longer than anything else I've come across, I think it deserves repeating.

Fred Kapln of Slate interviewed Stephen Biddle, a counter-terrorism expert on the Council of Foreign Relations and a consultant to Gen. Petraeus. Biddle gave his personal thought on how long we would need to be in Iraq:

Biddle also said (again, expressing his personal view) that the strategy in Iraq would require the presence of roughly 100,000 American troops for 20 years—and that, even so, it would be a "long-shot gamble."

We know that Pres. Fredo doesn't mind long-term, long-shot gambles because, as he once put it, we'll all be dead but what about Petraeus and Crocker?

THE JONES REPORT RE: LIFE FOR IRAQIS

I don't think the terrible situation the Iraqi people are in has sunk in with the American public. This is from page 33 of The Report of the Independent Commission on the Security Forces of Iraq. Head by retired general James L. Jones, it's also referred to as the Jones Report.


Violence remains a fact of life in Iraq. Those insurgents who perpetrate this violence are elusive, operate covertly, and seek to avoid direct engagement with Coalition and Iraqi forces. While violence has recently declined sharply in the Sunni-dominated Anbar province—the former stronghold of the insurgency—attacks have risen in Diyala, Balad, Basra, and Amarah. Violence remains endemic in Baghdad, despite measurable gains made since the implementation of Fardh al­ Qanoon (the Baghdad Security Plan) in February 2007 by Coalition and Iraqi forces.

Iraq's violent environment has placed its population under extreme duress. Iraq's population at the time of the 2003 invasion was about 26.5 million. Currently, more than 40,000 Iraqis leave Iraq each month. There are at least 2 million Iraqi refugees throughout the Middle East, whose presence places increasing pressure on Iraq's neighbors, and an additional 2.2 million displaced persons within Iraq.²⁸ Seventy percent of Iraqi residents lack adequate water supplies, compared with 50 percent in 2003.²⁹ Twenty-eight percent of children are malnourished, compared to 19 percent before the 2003 invasion. Ninety-two percent of Iraqi children suffer learning problems due to the stress of the war. Sadly, international funding for humanitarian assistance in Iraq has plummeted, from $453 million in 2005 to $95 million in 2006.³⁰

REFERENCES:

²⁸ "Iraqi Refugees Flee War-torn Country," Lehrer News Hour; available at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec07/refugees_07-26.html.
²⁹Oxfam, "Rising to the Humanitarian Challenge in Iraq," Briefing Paper 105, July 2007; available at http://www.oxfam.org/en/files/bp105_humanitarian_challenge_in_iraq_0707.pdf/download.
³⁰Oxfam, "Rising to the Humanitarian Challenge in Iraq."

FREDO AND OSAMA

The new tape by Osama is causing quite a stir. You can get the transcript here but before you read it, I'd like to provide a little historical context:

FLIP:
" Make no mistake: The United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts. " - G.W. Bush, 9/11/01

"Justice demands that those who helped or harbored the terrorists be punished -- and punished severely. The enormity of their evil demands it. We will use all the resources of the United States and our cooperating friends and allies to pursue those responsible for this evil, until justice is done. " - G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01

FLOP:
So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. G.W. Bush March 13, 2002 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. G.W. Bush March 13, 2002 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

THE PETRAEUS LETTER TO THE TROOPS

Gen. Petraeus wrote a letter to his troops (Reuters, DoD, PDF) and does admit that the political progress hoped for hasn't occurred:

Many of us had hoped this summer would be a time of tangible political progress at the national level as well. One of the justifications for the surge, after all, was that it would help create the space for Iraqi leaders to tackle the tough questions and agree on key pieces of "national reconciliation" legislation. It has not worked out as we had hoped. All participants, Iraqi and coalition alike, are dissatisfied by the halting progress on major legislative initiatives such as the oil framework law, revenue sharing, and de-ba'athification reform.

Thanx to the add-in PDF converter in Word 2007, I can post the text of his letter here:

HEADQUARTERS
MULTI-NATIONAL FORCE - IRAQ
BAGHDAD, IRAQ
APO AE 09342-1400
7 September 2007

Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and Civilians of Multi-National Force-Iraq:

We are now over two-and-a-half months into the surge of offensive operations made possible by the surge of forces, and I want to share with you my view of how I think we're doing. This letter is a bit longer than previous ones, since I feel you deserve a detailed description of what I believe we have – and have not –accomplished, as Ambassador Crocker and I finalize the assessment we will provide shortly to Congress.

Up front. my sense is that we have achieved tactical momentum and wrested the initiative from our enemies in a number of areas of Iraq. The result has been progress in the security arena, although it has, as you know, been uneven. Additionally, as you all appreciate very well, innumerable tasks remain and much hard work lies ahead. We are, in short, a long way from the goal line, but we do have the ball and we are driving down the field.

We face a situation that is exceedingly complex. Al Qaeda, associated insurgent groups, and militia extremists, some supported by Iran, continue to carry out attacks on us, our Iraqi partners and the Iraqi civilians we seek to secure. We have to contend with the relentless pace of operations, the crushing heat, and the emotions that we all experience during long deployments and tough combat. And we operate against a backdrop of limited Iraqi governmental capacity, institutions trying to rebuild, and various forms of corruption. All of this takes place in a climate of distrust and fear that stems from the sectarian violence that did so much damage to the fabric of Iraqi society in 2006 and into 2007, not to mention the decades of repression under Saddam's brutal regime. Tragically, sectarian violence continues to cause death and displacement in Baghdad and elsewhere, albeit at considerably reduced levels from 8 months ago, due, in large part, to your hard work and sacrifice together with our Iraqi counterparts.

In spite of these challenges, our operations – particularly the offensive operations we have conducted since mid-June – have helped produce progress in many areas on the ground. In fact, the number of attacks across the country has declined in 8 of the past 11 weeks, reaching during the last week in August a level not seen since June 2006. This trend is not just a result of greater numbers of Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces; it also reflects your determination, courage, and skill in conducting counterinsurgency operations. By taking the fight to the enemy, you have killed or captured dozens of leaders and thousands of members of Al Qaeda-lraq and extremist militia elements, you have taken many of Al Qaeda's former sanctuaries away from them, and you have dismantled a number of their car bomb and improvised explosive device networks. By living among the population with our Iraqi partners, you have been holding the areas you have cleared. By helping Iraqis reestablish basic services and local governance, you have helped exploit the security gains. And by partnering closely with Iraqi Security Forces, you have been strengthening Iraqi elements that will one day have sole responsibility for protecting their population. Indeed, while Iraqi forces clearly remain a work in progress, Iraqi soldiers and police are very much in the fight, and they continue to sustain losses that are two to three times our losses.

We are also building momentum in an emerging area of considerable importance – local reconciliation. Local Iraqi leaders are coming forward, opposing extremists, and establishing provisional units of neighborhood security volunteers. With growing Government of Iraq support, these volunteers are being integrated into legitimate security institutions to help improve local security. While this concept is playing out differently in various areas across Iraq, it is grounded in a desire shared by increasing numbers of Iraqis – to oppose extremist elements and their ideologies. This is very significant because, as many of you know first¬hand. extremists cannot survive without the support of the population. The popular rejection of Al Qaeda and its ideology has, for example, helped transform Anbar Province this year from one of the most dangerous areas of Iraq to one of the safest. The popular rejection of extremists has helped Coalition and Iraqi Forces take

- 2 -
away other areas from Al Qaeda as well, and we are seeing a spread of this sentiment in an ever-increasing number of Sunni areas. Now, in fact, we are also seeing a desire to reject extremists emerge in many Shi'a areas.

The progress has not, to be sure, been uniform across Baghdad or across Iraq. Accomplishments in some areas – for example, in Ramadi and in Anbar Province – have been greater than any of us might have predicted six months ago. The achievements in some other areas – for example, in some particularly challenging Baghdad neighborhoods and in reducing overall civilian casualties, especially those caused by periodic, barbaric Al Qaeda bombings – have not been as dramatic. However, the overall trajectory has been encouraging, especially when compared to the situation at the height of the sectarian violence in late 2006 and early 2007.

Many of us had hoped this summer would be a time of tangible political progress at the national level as well. One of the justifications for the surge, after all, was that it would help create the space for Iraqi leaders to tackle the tough questions and agree on key pieces of "national reconciliation" legislation. It has not worked out as we had hoped. All participants, Iraqi and coalition alike, are dissatisfied by the halting progress on major legislative initiatives such as the oil framework law, revenue sharing, and de-ba'athification reform. At the same time, however, our appreciation of what this legislation represents for Iraqi leaders has grown. These laws are truly fundamental in nature and will help determine how Iraqis will share power and resources in the new Iraq. While much work remains to be done before these critical issues are resolved, the seriousness with which Iraqi leaders came together at their summit in late August has given hope that they are up to the task before them, even if it is clearly taking more time than we initially expected.

In the coming months, our coalition's countries and all Iraqis will continue to depend on each of you and on our Iraqi counterparts to keep the pressure on the extremists, to help improve security and strengthen the rule of law for all Iraqis. to work with the Government of Iraq to integrate local volunteers into local security and national institutions, to assist with the restoration and improvement of basic services, and to continue the development of conditions that foster reconciliation. For our part, Ambassador Crocker and I will continue to do everything in our power to help the Prime Minister and the Government of Iraq achieve the meaningful results that will ensure that your sacrifices and those of your comrades help produce sustainable security for Iraq over the long term. A stable and secure Iraq that denies extremists a safe haven and has a government that is representative of and responsive to all Iraqis helps protect the vital interests of our coalition countries. A stable and secure Iraq will also benefit Iraq's citizens and Iraq's neighbors alike. bringing calm to a region full of challenges and employing Iraq's human capital and natural resource blessings for the benefit of all.

As I noted at the outset of this letter, over the next few days, Ambassador Crocker and I will share with the U.S. Congress and the American people our assessment of the situation in Iraq. I will also describe the recommendations I have provided to my chain of command. I will go before Congress conscious of the strain on our forces, the sacrifices that you and your families are making, the gains we have made in Iraq, the challenges that remain, and the importance of building on what we and our Iraqi counterparts have fought so hard to achieve.

Thanks once again for what each of you continues to do. Our Nations have asked much of you and your families. It remains the greatest of honors to serve with you.

Sincerely,

David H, Petracus
General, United States Army Commanding

BUSH'S BUBBLE ECONOMY IS COLLAPSING

For all the clapping half-wits like Hannity have been doing about the economy, just like they do about Iraq, the reality doesn't change: things haven't been going well and it looks like the situation will just get worse. For the first time in 4 years, the economy actually lost jobs this August:

Economy Loses Jobs, Raising Fears
Sep 7 03:18 PM US/Eastern
By JEANNINE AVERSA
AP Economics Writer

A report released Friday by the Labor Department showed the nation's payrolls shrank by 4,000 in August. It was the first decline in jobs since August 2003. Payrolls fell by 42,000 at that time as the job market was still struggling to recover from the 2001 recession.

Factories led the way in job cuts; they slashed 46,000 positions last month, the most since July 2003. Construction companies eliminated 22,000 jobs, the most in six months. The carnage could turn out to be even worse because the report—based on information as of mid-August—doesn't capture the full brunt of the credit crisis which intensified during the month.

Adding to the gloom: the economy produced 81,000 fewer jobs in June and July combined than the government previously thought.

The decline in construction jobs mirrors the problem in the housing industry. Countrywide is reducing payroll by as much as 20% and expects a 25% decline in the number of mortgages in 2008 compared to 2007. Locally, we've got some serious problems:

Record low unemployment poised to rise
DES predicts creation of positions will drop sharply through '08
By Howard Fischer
Capitol Media Services
Tucson, Arizona Published: 09.07.2007

The state Department of Economic Security predicted Thursday that Arizona will create just 66,600 new jobs this year. That's just half the nearly 135,000 jobs added in 2006 over the prior year.

And the long-term situation is even more dismal: Don Wehbey, the agency's economic analysis manager, said Arizona will create only 47,000 more jobs in 2008.

The prediction is far more pessimistic than the DES thought even six months ago. ... He said what changed that was the "meltdown" of the subprime-mortgage market.

...the state's housing market continued to weaken on its own, hitting the construction industry particularly hard. Wehbey predicted there actually will be close to 15,000 fewer people working in construction by the end of 2008 than there were at the beginning of this year.

THIS IS EMBARASSING

Our preznit is a lemon - can we get a refund?

Bush shows gift of gaffe at APEC summit
Fri Sep 7, 2007 6:25 AM EDT


SYDNEY (Reuters) - Even for someone as gaffe-prone as U.S. President George W. Bush, he was in rare form on Friday, confusing APEC with OPEC and transforming Australian troops into Austrians.

Bush's tongue started slipping almost as soon as he started talking at a business forum on the eve of an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Sydney.

"Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for your introduction," he told Prime Minister John Howard. "Thank you for being such a fine host for the OPEC summit."

As the audience of several hundred people erupted in laughter, Bush corrected himself and joked, "He invited me to the OPEC summit next year." Australia has never been a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.

Later in his speech, Bush recounted how Howard had gone to visit "Austrian troops" last year in Iraq. There are, in fact, no Austrian troops there. But Australia has about 1,500 Australian military personnel in and around the country.

Upon finishing his speech, Bush took the wrong way off-stage and, looking slightly perplexed, had to be re-directed by Howard to a centre-stage exit.

GEN. PETRAEUS IS FULL OF IT

For this statement alone, he should be re-called and we should IMMEDIATELY begin a draw down.

From his e-mail interview with the Boston Globe:

As the security situation in an area improves, forces are required to hold the gains that we have made. Over time some of those forces can be local police units working with the Iraqi Army and Coalition Forces in Joint Security Stations.

Somebody clue him in:

The Iraqi police are worthless!

[UPDATE: The Jones Report is referring to the National Police Force, not the locals]
Just in case you might think this was just a minor slip, Petraeus continues to lie about the Anbar Awakening:

First, we have seen on-the-ground reconciliation among groups that were opposed to the government. The Anbar Awakening is the most prominent, where Sunni Arabs have turned against Al Qaeda and are now being integrated into Iraqi Security Forces.

The Anbar Sunnis have revolted ONLY because they hate Al Qaeda more than they hate us and in any case, they are NOT reconciled with the central government. (here, here, here and here)

HOORAY FOR THE ACLU!!!

(And for the anonymous ISP who asked the ACLU to take the case) You can find the PDF of the decision here. The issue is whether the FBI may prohibit the recipient of an NSL from EVER disclosing that it received it.

Here's the nub of the legal issue:

If a petition to modify or set aside the nondisclosure requirement is filed within one year of the NSL request, the reviewing court may grant such relief only if it finds that "there is no reason to believe" disclosure "may result" in one or more of the Enumerated Harms. 18 U.S.C. § 3511(b)(2). Moreover, if one of several authorized senior FBI officials "certifies that disclosure may endanger the national security of the United States or interfere with diplomatic relations,such certification shall be treated as conclusive unless the court finds that the certification was made in bad faith." Id.

...the Court must now consider whether the nondisclosure provision, with the judicial review now contemplated, still runs afoul of the First Amendment.

The judge took note of the abuses the Dept. of Justice's own Inspector General found in his report on the use of national security letters and discussed other areas, such as wiretaps, that have been kept secret BUT only when approved by a Court to begin with. He concluded :

In light of the seriousness of the potential intrusion into the ndividual's personal affairs and the significant possibility of a chilling effect on ppeech and association -- particularly of expression that is critical of the government or its policies -- a compelling need exists to ensure that the use of NSLs is subject to the safeguards of public accountability, checks and balances, and separation of powers that our Constitution prescribes. Accordingly, the issue now before the Court is not whether, or under what circumstances, the government should possess the authority to issue NSLs. Rather, the more fundamental question is the extent of the authority that the First Amendment allows the government to exercise in keeping its use of NSLs secret, insofar as such secrecy inhibits freedom of speech.

On the First Amendment issue, the judge had 2 main findings:

The Court's review of First Amendment jurisprudence yields two primary conclusions. First, the government's use of nondisclosure orders must be narrowly-tailored on a case¬by-case basis. That is, a nondisclosure order may not be broader in either scope or duration than the degree of secrecy required to serve the government's interest in protecting national security. Second, the nondisclosure orders must be subject to meaningful judicial review. To conform to prevailing constitutional norms as read by this Court, taking into account the unique latitude and added flexibility national security needs demand under ordinary circumstances, as well as the practicalities of surveillance work before a target is adequately identified, in issuing an NSL the government must either affirmatively terminate the nondisclosure requirement or bear the burden of justifying to a court why continued secrecy is necessary within a reasonable period of time after the FBI issues an NSL containing a nondisclosure order.

There is one further, very important issue: "the fundamental constitutional principles of checks and balances and separation of powers." The judge found that both Congress and the President improperly limited the nature of judicial review:

Independent of the First Amendment deficiencies identified by the Court, the deferential standard of review imposed on reviewing courts by § 3511(b) fails not only because it creates too great a danger that constitutionally protected speech will be suppressed, but more fundamentally because it reflects an attempt by Congress and the executive to infringe upon the judiciary's designated role under the Constitution. To conform with § 3511(b) as drafted, a court reviewing a nondisclosure order must apply not the standard of review the judge determines is mandated by constitutional law, but an overly deferential standard imposed by Congress. It is axiomatic that in our system of government it is the province of the courts to say what the law is. When Congress attempts to curtail or supersede this role, it jeopardizes the delicate balance of powers among the three branches of government and endangers the very foundations of our constitutional system. Thus, for this reason as well, 3511(b) fails.

The strong conclusion:

Any restriction on speech which is content-based and acts as a prior restraint is presumed unconstitutional, and the government bears the burden of demonstrating that the provision satisfies strict scrutiny.

ANOTHER OFFICIAL REPORT

(Via Atrios)

According to the NY Daily News, the Congressional Research Service (go here for publicly available reports) issued a report on August 15 about Iraq that comes to this realistic conclusion:

Iraq government near collapse, secret report says

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Thursday, September 6th 2007, 4:00 AM

"My assessment is that because of the number and breadth of parties boycotting the cabinet, the Iraqi government is in essential collapse," Kenneth Katzman, the author of the report, said. "That argues against any real prospects for political reconciliation."

Without a political infrastructure in Iraq, any military progress would be short-lived, he added.

Katzman, who grew up in Long Island, also challenged the success of the Baghdad Security Plan, known as the troop "surge," which President Bush claims is working.
"I would even question the military progress," he said.

Many senior State Department officials in Iraq believe a political solution to the war is now "hopeless," according to a top diplomat. "I would agree with that," Katzman said.

EDWARDS' BAD WORD CHOICE

John Edwards has some very good ideas about improving America's health care system but a bad feel for words. This is how the AP covered one of his ideas:

Edwards Backs Mandatory Preventive Care
Sep 2 04:27 PM US/Eastern
By AMY LORENTZEN
Associated Press Writer

TIPTON, Iowa (AP) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards said on Sunday that his universal health care proposal would require that Americans go to the doctor for preventive care.

"It requires that everybody be covered. It requires that everybody get preventive care," he told a crowd sitting in lawn chairs in front of the Cedar County Courthouse. "If you are going to be in the system, you can't choose not to go to the doctor for 20 years. You have to go in and be checked and make sure that you are OK."

This notion that the government will mandate check-ups is precisely the wrong way to put the issue. The wingnuts are going crazy about the government "mandating" preventive care and that notion goes against the American sense of freedom. Ezra Klein points out that the plan Edwards has made available on his website does NOT mention "mandates":

He will also require preventive care coverage, with public plans offering preventive care without co-payments, and provide incentives for patients to participate.

Ezra puts Edwards' position better than Edwards did:

Preventive care will be covered, and in the public plan, it will be free. Patients will have incentives to avail themselves of preventive options. But there won't be any mandate for X doctor's visits every Y years. Insofar as anyone has to do anything, the insurers will have to offer patients the option of preventive care. That's a perfectly defensible, even worthwhile, policy position. Edwards should explain it much better.

FUDGING THE NUMBERS, PART II

I posted below about the Pentagon's problems with numbers and Petraeus' problems. As we approach the debate about progress in Iraq, others have also noticed a problem, especially with the level of violence. This WaPo article reports that the military admits it doesn't track internecine violence, such as the Shia-on-Shia violence found in Basra. The Morning Edition segment reveals that the Pentagon is making the preposterous claim that the horrific bombing that killed 500 Yazidis in August was not a case of sectarian violence. Guy Raz of NPR puts the problem very clearly:

So is the surge working? The short answer is that no one can know for certain because statistics only tell a small part of the story.

Experts Doubt Drop In Violence in Iraq
Military Statistics Called Into Question
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 6, 2007; Page A16

Reductions in violence form the centerpiece of the Bush administration's claim that its war strategy is working. In congressional testimony Monday, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, is expected to cite a 75 percent decrease in sectarian attacks. According to senior U.S. military officials in Baghdad, overall attacks in Iraq were down to 960 a week in August, compared with 1,700 a week in June, and civilian casualties had fallen 17 percent between December 2006 and last month. Unofficial Iraqi figures show a similar decrease.

"Let's just say that there are several different sources within the administration on violence, and those sources do not agree," Comptroller General David Walker told Congress on Tuesday in releasing a new Government Accountability Office report on Iraq.

Intelligence analysts computing aggregate levels of violence against civilians for the NIE puzzled over how the military designated attacks as combat, sectarian or criminal, according to one senior intelligence official in Washington. "If a bullet went through the back of the head, it's sectarian," the official said. "If it went through the front, it's criminal."

"Depending on which numbers you pick," he said, "you get a different outcome." Analysts found "trend lines . . . going in different directions" compared with previous years, when numbers in different categories varied widely but trended in the same direction. "It began to look like spaghetti."

Among the most worrisome trends cited by the NIE was escalating warfare between rival Shiite militias in southern Iraq that has consumed the port city of Basra and resulted last month in the assassination of two southern provincial governors. According to a spokesman for the Baghdad headquarters of the Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I), those attacks are not included in the military's statistics. "Given a lack of capability to accurately track Shiite-on-Shiite and Sunni-on-Sunni violence, except in certain instances," the spokesman said, "we do not track this data to any significant degree."

Attacks by U.S.-allied Sunni tribesmen -- recruited to battle Iraqis allied with al-Qaeda -- are also excluded from the U.S. military's calculation of violence levels.

...the bipartisan Iraq Study Group identified "significant underreporting of violence," [NOTE: in one case, going from over 1,100 to 93] noting that "a murder of an Iraqi is not necessarily counted as an attack. If we cannot determine the sources of a sectarian attack, that assault does not make it into the data base." The report concluded that "good policy is difficult to make when information is systematically collected in a way that minimizes its discrepancy with policy goals."

When Petraeus told an Australian newspaper last week that sectarian attacks had decreased 75 percent "since last year," the statistic was quickly e-mailed to U.S. journalists in a White House fact sheet. Asked for detail, MNF-I said that "last year" referred to December 2006, when attacks spiked to more than 1,600.

By March, however -- before U.S. troop strength was increased under Bush's strategy -- the number had dropped to 600, only slightly less than in the same month last year. That is about where it has remained in 2007, with what MNF-I said was a slight increase in April and May "but trending back down in June-July."

Petraeus's spokesman, Col. Steven A. Boylan, said he was certain that Petraeus had made a comparison with December in the interview with the Australian paper, which did not publish a direct Petraeus quote. No qualifier appeared in the White House fact sheet.

Today, NPR's Morning Edition had a segment on the violence statistics and concluded that we have reason to be skeptical of the numbers from the Pentagon.

Statistics the Weapon of Choice in Surge Debate
by Guy Raz
Morning Edition, September 6, 2007

Sometime around February 2004, a top military official in Iraq estimated that there were about 15,000 total insurgents. About a year later, U.S. military leaders in Iraq announced that 15,000 insurgents had been killed or captured in the previous year.

In private, a skeptical military adviser pointed out to commanders that the numbers didn't make sense. "If all the insurgents were killed," he asked, "why are they fighting harder than ever?"

[NOTE: I made a similar observation about Pres. Fredo's claim that we are eliminating 1,500 terrorists a month]

...while there's no doubt the numbers of troops killed in Anbar this year is lower than last year, troop casualties have spiked dramatically in other provinces.
Twenty American service members were killed in Diyala Province last year. So far this year, 100 U.S. service members have died in Diyala. Every month this year, more American troops have been killed as compared with the same month last year.

The Pentagon says sectarian deaths in Iraq were sharply down in August. But the military's definition of what constitutes a sectarian murder is narrow. Last month's massive bombing in northern Iraq that killed more than 500 ethnic Yezidis made August 2007 the second-deadliest for Iraqi civilians. Yet the Pentagon doesn't consider large bombings like that one an example of sectarian violence. The result is that it can show that sectarian murders are down.

And then there's the issue of Anbar province. Both the White House and the Pentagon have attributed the changes in Anbar to the surge strategy. But several military advisers who worked in Iraq until late last year have said that is simply not true. MacGregor says that the increasing cooperation between U.S. forces and Sunni tribes in Anbar started more than 18 months ago, long before the "surge."

OK, SO WHO CONTROLS THEM???

This is from the WaPo's article on the Jones Commission:

The Interior Ministry has "little control" over the 140,000 armed members of the Facilities Protection Service, which guards government buildings.

BENCHMARKS ARE UNAMERICAN AND...

THEY ONLY EMBOLDEN THE ENEMY AND THE DEMOCRATS CAN'T BE TRUSTED WITH OUR NATIONAL SECURITY [/WINGNUT]

GAO Criticizes Homeland Security's Efforts to Fulfill Its Mission
By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 6, 2007; Page A10

Hobbled by inadequate funding, unclear priorities, continuing reorganizations and the absence of an overarching strategy, the Department of Homeland Security is failing to achieve its mission of preventing and responding to terrorist attacks or natural disasters, according to a comprehensive report by the Government Accountability Office.

The highly critical report disputes recent upbeat assessments by the Bush administration by concluding that the DHS has failed to make even moderate progress toward eight of 14 internal government benchmarks more than four years after its creation.

PETRAEUS ISN'T GOD

The WaPo notes the Jones Commission report on the Iraqi security forces. The headline tells the sad story:

Iraqi Army Unable To Take Over Within A Year, Report Says
Breakup of National Police Is Urged

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 6, 2007; Page A01

Iraq's army, despite measurable progress, will be unable to take over internal security from U.S. forces in the next 12 to 18 months and "cannot yet meaningfully contribute to denying terrorists safe haven," according to a report on the Iraqi security forces published today.

The report, prepared by a commission of retired senior U.S. military officers, describes the 25,000-member Iraqi national police force and the Interior Ministry, which controls it, as riddled with sectarianism and corruption. The ministry, it says, is "dysfunctional" and is "a ministry in name only." The commission recommended that the national police force be disbanded.

The Post lets us know another piece of BS from Petraeus:

As he ended a year in charge of training the Iraqi security forces in 2005, then-Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus said that Iraq's military had made "enormous progress" and that its readiness to take over from U.S. forces was growing "with each passing week."

The Iraqis aren't any better:

“[O]ur security forces will be capable of taking over the security portfolio in all Iraqi provinces within one year and a half.” —Nuri al-Maliki, 5/24/2006

“We envisage the U.S. troop presence by year’s end to be under 100,000, with most of the remaining troops to return home by the end of 2007.” —Mowaffak al-Rubaie, Iraq’s national security advisor, June 20, 2006

ANOTHER INSTALLMENT OF ...

"IT PAYS TO FOLLOW LINKS"

I opened an e-mail from the Center for American Progress and followed a link to a Washington Times article, mostly out of curiosity to see what CAP could find of value in one of the major right-wing organs. There I found an article that summarized a blog entry of a "Australian Col. David Kilcullen, who just completed a tour as senior counterinsurgency aide to U.S. commander Gen. David H. Petraeus in Baghdad."

The colonel is part of a group blog - Small Wars Journal - and has an entry that deals with the Anbar Awakening. Kilcullen discusses the causes of the uprising and one of the points is the cultural difference between the Sunni Al Qaeda and the Sunni Anbari. One of the major stress points was Al Qaeda's attempt to marry into the tribes, something the Anbari refused. The refusal led to violence between the Anbari and Al Qaeda, thus we have the Anbar Awakening.

Kilcullen makes two other observations that I think deserve much more attention:

1) Iraqi society is based upon tribes, not religious sects. There are tribes that contain both Sunni and Shia and they do intermarry. It may make more sense for the tribes to be considered states and be represented in Parliament instead of a provincial (geographic) system.

2) Here I will simply quote Kilcullen:

But we should remember that this uprising against extremism belongs to the Iraqi people, not to us – it was their idea, they started it, they are leading it, it is happening on their terms and on their timeline, and our job is to support where needed, ensure proper political safeguards and human rights standards are in place, but ultimately to realize that this will play out in ways that may be good or bad, but are fundamentally unpredictable.

His entire post is worth a read.

STILL MORE ON WMD

Sidney Blumenthal at Salon provides a little support to former CIA official Tyler Drumheller's claim that the CIA had information from an Iraqi insider that showed there were no WMD in Iraq. The insider was Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, and you can find the original story here. Here's the heart of Blumenthal's piece:

Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller's account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it. They described what Tenet said to Bush about the lack of WMD, and how Bush responded, and noted that Tenet never shared Sabri's intelligence with then Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to the former officers, the intelligence was also never shared with the senior military planning the invasion, which required U.S. soldiers to receive medical shots against the ill effects of WMD and to wear protective uniforms in the desert.

The next day, Sept. 18, Tenet briefed Bush on Sabri. "Tenet told me he briefed the president personally," said one of the former CIA officers. According to Tenet, Bush's response was to call the information "the same old thing." Bush insisted it was simply what Saddam wanted him to think. "The president had no interest in the intelligence," said the CIA officer. The other officer said, "Bush didn't give a fuck about the intelligence. He had his mind made up."

Tenet, according to the sources, never told Powell about existing intelligence that there were no WMD, and Powell's speech was later revealed to be a series of falsehoods.

The officers brought this material to the attention of the newly formed Iraqi Operations Group within the CIA. But those in charge of the IOG were on a mission to prove that Saddam did have WMD and would not give credit to anything that came from the French. "They kept saying the French were trying to undermine the war," said one of the CIA officers.

The CIA officers on the case awaited the report they had submitted on Sabri to be circulated back to them, but they never received it. They learned later that a new report had been written.

The information provided by Sabri was considered so sensitive that it was never shown to those who assembled the NIE on Iraqi WMD.

I'd like to know who in the IOG decided to ignore the Sabri information and who decided to withold it from the NIE.

CAP'N ED DRINKS BAD RUM, CHANNELS HANNITY

This afternoon, I heard Sean Insannity once again accuse a Democrat of "stabbing our troops in the back." Sen. Schumer (D-NY) stated, correctly as Anthony Cordesman noted, that the success in Anbar is due to the locals turning against Al Qaeda, not teh awesome Surge. To Insannity and the drunk Cap'n, that means Schumer was attacking our troops.

THIS SHOULD BE FUN

(Via Atrios) Pam Spaulding lets us know the Jeebus Freaks are holding their own presidential debate on Sept. 17th. WorldWingNuttiest Joseph Farah will be the moderator and the questions will mostly come from these lunatics:

* Paul Weyrich, founder and president of the Free Congress Foundation
* Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of Eagle Forum
* Don Wildmon of the American Family Association
* Judge Roy Moore, columnist at WND and head of the Foundation for Moral Law
* Rick Scarborough of Vision America
* Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel.

They provided an e-mail address so people can send in questions they'd like the candidates to answer (I sent these): f2ainfo@f2a.org

GEN. JACK "RIPPER" KEANE ON IRAQ

Keane is one of the architects of teh awesome Surge and was on an ABC "panel" to discuss the war. It's not really a panel because all the idiots on it supported the war in the first place, see Atrios for more.

Here are a couple of his remarks that provide more evidence he's a SERIOUS PERSON:

"...we've made some significant progress."

"...they're seeking reconciliation"

BTW, here's a list of the all the "architects":

The Iraq Planning Group at the American Enterprise Institute consists of the
following participants:

• Frederick W. Kagan, AEI
• Jack Keane, General, U.S. Army, Retired
• David Barno, Lieutenant General, U.S. Army, Retired
• Danielle Pletka, AEI
• Rend al-Rahim, Iraq Foundation
• Joel Armstrong, Colonel, U.S. Army, Retired
• Daniel Dwyer, Major, U.S. Army, Retired
• Larry Crandall, Consultant
• Larry Sampler, Institute for Defense Analyses
• Michael Eisenstadt, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
• Kimberly Kagan, Center for Peace and Security Studies, Georgetown
• Michael Rubin, AEI
• Reuel Marc Gerecht, AEI
• Thomas Donnelly, AEI
• Gary Schmitt, AEI
• Mauro De Lorenzo, AEI
• Vance Serchuk, AEI

The following members of the AEI staff provided invaluable assistance and support:

• Molly McKew
• Laura Conniff
• Jonathan Bronitsky
• Adrian Myers
• Colin Monaghan
• Claude Aubert
• Scott R. Palmer

IRAQ TRAVEL WARNING UPDATE

Last December, I posted excerpts from the State Dept.'s travel advisory for Iraq. I looked today and not much has changed:

This information is current as of today, Wed Sep 05 16:20:10 2007.

IRAQ
July 23, 2007
This Travel Warning updates the current security situation and reiterates the dangers of the use of civilian aircraft and road travel within Iraq. This supersedes the Travel Warning of August 28, 2006.

The Department of State continues to strongly warn U.S. citizens against travel to Iraq, which remains very dangerous.

There are daily attacks against Multinational Forces - Iraq (MNF-I) and Iraqi Security Forces throughout the country.

Civilian and military aircraft arriving at and departing from Baghdad International Airport (BIAP) for other major cities in Iraq have been subjected to small arms and missiles. Civilian aircraft generally lack defense systems capable of defeating man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS). As a result of a security incident at the Baghdad International Airport (BIAP), the U.S. Embassy has prohibited all U.S. government employees from departing BIAP on commercial airlines until further notice.

All vehicular travel in Iraq is extremely dangerous. ... Attacks occur throughout the day, but travel at night is exceptionally dangerous.

Travel in or through Ramadi and Fallujah; in and between al-Hillah, al-Basrah, Kirkuk, Baqubah (Diyala Province), and Baghdad; between the International Zone and Baghdad International Airport; and from Baghdad to Mosul is particularly dangerous.

Overland travel should be undertaken only when absolutely necessary and with the appropriate security.

A DRUDGICO HACK TAKES ON THE A-MAN

A proud member of the Grid Iron Club doesn't like the "anger" that Atrios has toward pinheads in the DC Establishment like David Broder. This member refers skeptically to "what these critics perceive to be Washington’s permanent ruling class." Well, I pointed out before that the DC ruling class has been around for quite some time and I fail to see how someone who's supposedly paying attention can miss it.

SOME GOOD NEWS

Foulwell is finally gone and now there's a little more good news: D. James Kennedy died! Kennedy was a theocratic totalist and indulged people who had bizarre views about the world. The AP cites a 1996 LA Times article in which Kennedy said "God should be in every sphere of life: economics, business, education, government, art and science." The AP also noted that Kennedy was a typical religious barbarian: he denied both evolution and global warming.

Good riddance!

BASRA: PART OF A FAILING STATE

Now that the British have withdrawn from the 2nd largest city in Iraq, what's the security situation like? Not very good.

U.K. Exit Leaves Basra's Future In Doubt
As Troops Withdraw From Iraq's Second-Largest City,
Are Local Troops Ready To Take Over?
BASRA, Iraq, Sept. 4, 2007


While on the way to see the local governor, Logan reports that their lives were in the hands of his uncle and personal security force - the only men Gov. Mohammed al-Waili trusts in a city that's become a battleground for rival militias that have infiltrated the police force and tried repeatedly to kill him. "Those policemen outside the front of your building, do you trust them" asked Logan. "Not all of them," al-Waili replied.

The Asia Times let us know who the main players are:

Basra crisis is Iran's opportunity
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
Sep 5, 2007

...the ongoing inter-Shi'ite power struggle. This is mainly between and among the three dominant groups, Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army and its sub-factions, the Fadhila Party presently running the city, and the Supreme Iraq Islamic Council and its Badr militias.

WHY SHOULD THIS BE CLASSIFED?

From the WaPo:

The controversy followed last-minute changes made in the final draft of the report after the Defense Department maintained that its conclusions were too harsh and insisted that some of the information it contained -- such as the extent of a fall in the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating without U.S. assistance -- should not appear in the final, unclassified version.

Tom at Atrio's place brought this to my attention a bit ago and I'm still puzzled about why they would insist that this is hush-hush info. After all, back in September 2005 we were told by Gen. Casey that the number of Iraqi battalions capable of operating independently dropped from 3 to 1:

Associated Press
Updated: 11:47 a.m. MT Sept 29, 2005
WASHINGTON -
The number of Iraqi battalions capable of combat without U.S. support has dropped from three to one, the top American commander in Iraq told Congress Thursday, prompting Republicans to question whether U.S. troops will be able to withdraw next year.

2 BAGHDAD TALES FROM THE WAPO

Both point to the continuing sectarian nature of the conflict in Iraq.

One about the Shia:

Many Trainees Are Complicit With 'Enemy Targets'
By Joshua PartlowWashington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, September 4, 2007; Page A10

BAGHDAD -- The platoon of American soldiers was pinned down in an alley outside the holiest Shiite shrine in western Baghdad's Kadhimiyah neighborhood. Machine-gun fire sprayed from apartment windows and rooftops with a deafening clatter. The troops were 15 yards from their Humvees, but they didn't know if they could survive the dash.

Less than a mile away, a powerful Shiite parliament member stood inside an American military base, in the office of the Iraqi army brigade commander responsible for Kadhimiyah. The Americans had called for Iraqi army backup, but according to the brigade commander and American officers, the lawmaker would help ensure that no assistance arrived from the Iraqis that crucial day.

While no Americans were injured, it marked the start of the deterioration of security in Kadhimiyah, once one of Baghdad's safest neighborhoods. It also made plain -- "the first time the complicity was staring us right in the face," as one American soldier put it -- that the Iraqi army's problem in the area was about more than just being under-trained or ill-equipped.

...the Iraqi army in Kadhimiyah is so thoroughly infiltrated with Mahdi Army militiamen that U.S. and Iraqi soldiers say it is close to useless.

"The unit is basically combat-ineffective. We're trying to get them to develop enemy targets, but the enemy targets are their friends," Harty said. "I think the most they've ever found is one rifle, which is very ridiculous, and a waste of time."

The other about the Sunnis:

Signing Up Sunnis With 'Insurgent' on Their Résumés

By Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, September 4, 2007; Page A11

The American military recruited Qaisi and thousands like him to fight the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq, but Qaisi's most feared enemies are soldiers in the Iraqi army's Muthanna Brigade, and his allegiance does not lie with the government he is now being trained to serve.

In the villages around the Abu Ghraib district on the western outskirts of Baghdad, American commanders have achieved their goal of enlisting more than 1,000 of these local Sunni recruits into the Iraqi security forces.

"We don't trust this government. This government belongs to Iran," said the 29-year-old former security guard for a soft-drink company. "The Iraqi government knows we are innocent guys, but they want to kill us."

The soldier agreed that security had improved greatly in the area since the Volunteers began cooperating, but asked what would follow the defeat or ouster of al-Qaeda in Iraq: "I think there is some risk of them being Volunteers by day and terrorists by night."

MORE ON THE WAR PR MACHINE

(Via Atrios) Matthew Yglesias let us know that the "liberal" Brookings Institution will have a panel discussion about the progress reports of Petraeus & Crocker. Funny thing is, 4 out of 5 panel members supported the war.

Spencer Ackerman lets us know that AEI is starting the push for at least a major attack on Iran, going so far as to have half-wit gasbag Newt Gingrich speak next Monday about the "threat to civilization." After Newt, a panel of war whores and neo-cons will discuss Michael Ledeen's newest waste of paper, The Iranian Time Bomb.

PROGRESS, FRED KAGAN STYLE

Back in March, the Christian Science Monitor wrote that 100 shops in the Dora Market had re-opened. Now, we learn from the WaPo that there are over 340 shops open. This sounds like great progress but lets look at the details the WaPo and other papers supply.

1) The distrust of the locals (Sunnis) of the police (mostly Shia) remains.
2) We paid many of the shop owners to re-open, even rebuilding for them.
3) Some of the shops sell either little or nothing, "dust" as one U.S. lieutenant said.
4) Without the presence of the U.S. troops, most of the shops would close because
of security reasons.
5) The Iraqi army STILL isn't ready to take over even this operation.
6) The head of the local chamber of commerce won't go to the market without an armed guard.
7) Before the war, the market had from 700 to 850 shops that were not only really selling goods, they were also open past midnight. Now, they are open for only a few hours and by noon the market is deserted.
8) In March, Dora was described as a volatile neighborhood. In September, the same adjective is used.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH FRED KAGAN?

Kagan, one of the architects of the Surge (although we've been told a different story about who came up with the idea), criticizes the GAO report in The Weekly Standard because, apparently, "we don't need no stinkin' benchmarks." Instead we need a measurement of the progress toward the benchmarks, NOT whether the benchmarks have been met or not.

Kagan goes on to criticize the failure of the GAO to take into account the Anbar Awakening but many, including the U.S. military, have noted that it is NOT a model for other parts of Iraq and is NOT an indication that the Sunnis are reconciled to having U.S. forces in Iraq or the central government.

Finally, Kagan criticizes the report for failing to see that sectarian violence has been reduced by the Surge. Unfortunately, there's no evidence for Kagan's claim, at least as far as Reuters, the AP, the LA Times and the NY Times can tell.

THEY REALLY DO WANT A KING

Yesterday I was listening to a re-broadcast of one of Mark "Foamer" Levin's shows and one of his caller's complained about Pres. Fredo, but not in the way you might think. The caller was critical of Fredo because he wasn't standing up enough to the other 2 branches of government. He wants Fredo to tell them to stuff it when they try to limit any of Fredo's actions. Foamer agreed and emphasized once again how the federal courts were out of control. This is a great example of the authoritarian personality and puts into perspective something I heard Andrew C. McCarthy say a few weeks ago on Slots Bennett's show.

McCarthy is a contributor to the National Review and the director of the Center for Law and Counterrorism at the (wingnut) Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He was also a Federal prosecutor. Slots and Bennett were discussing national security issues and McCarthy said that he'd like to get rid of FISA altogether because it was no longer needed. In McCarthy's world, politicians are now so honest that they would never condone actions outside the law. FISA is just a remnant of the reaction to the Nixon years.

Spencer Ackerman at TPM Muckraker points out an article in the upcoming NY Times Sunday Magazine that talks about another lawyer who worked for the criminal Bush regime. It's a good article about how Fredo's Executive Branch has been trying to amass pre-Watergate power and I found this tidbit interesting:

“We’re one bomb away from getting rid of that obnoxious [FISA] court,” Goldsmith recalls Addington telling him in February 2004. In his book, Goldsmith claims that Addington and other top officials treated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act the same way they handled other laws they objected to: “They blew through them in secret based on flimsy legal opinions that they guarded closely so no one could question the legal basis for the operations,” he writes. Goldsmith’s first experienced this extraordinary concealment, or “strict compartmentalization,” in late 2003 when, he recalls, Addington angrily denied a request by the N.S.A.’s inspector general to see a copy of the Office of Legal Counsel’s legal analysis supporting the secret surveillance program. “Before I arrived in O.L.C., not even N.S.A. lawyers were allowed to see the Justice Department’s legal analysis of what N.S.A. was doing,” Goldsmith writes.

David Addington was Cheney's legal counsel and is now, with the resignation of the criminal Scooter Libby, Cheney's chief of staff. According to Jane Harman, "He believes that in time of war, there is total authority for the president to waive any rules to carry out his objectives." Colin Powell was reportedly more succinct: “He doesn’t care about the Constitution.”

So, we have a wingnut caller, a wingnut radio host who's also a lawyer, a former federal prosecutor and the Vice President's current chief of staff who all agree that the President should have nearly unlimited powers. These are NOT isolated or rare examples of the conservative mindset and should serve as a reminder of why these people are so dangerous to America.

LOCAL JOB GROWTH

Given this:

Arizona home prices drop for the first time in 16 years
Good news for buyers, but costs are expected to inch up within year
By Howard Fischer
Capitol Media Services
Tucson, Arizona Published: 08.31.2007
Housing prices in Arizona officially waded into the red last quarter — the first time that has happened in 16 years.
New figures Thursday from the federal Office of Housing Enterprise Oversight show that home values in the state dropped nearly three-tenths of a percent in the second quarter of this year compared to the prior quarter. The last time the state dipped into negative numbers was in 1991.

I was expecting an actual decline in the number of construction jobs. I finally came across an article that discusses what the impact on the housing industry decline will have on jobs in AZ: not that much.

Continuing drop in construction jobs cools state economy
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona Published: 09.04.2007

Construction job growth is expected to have the biggest drop among all nonfarm employment categories in 2007, leading a cool down in the state economy.

According to the latest issue of the Arizona Blue Chip Economic Forecast, construction jobs are predicted to drop from an 11.9 percent growth rate in 2006 to 1.1 percent in 2007.

LUCK AND PLANNING IN ANBAR

Anthony Cordesman said that the Surge wouldn't have been at all successful if the Anbar tribes had not decided to fight against Al Qaeda. I've already pointed out that this change occurred about a year ago and now the WH spin is that the Surge was planned with this in mind. From a 9/3/2007 press briefing by Gates, Hadley and Lute:

SECRETARY GATES: Let me start and then Steve follow up, and Doug if he wants to say something. I think that what has happened in Anbar is not just fortuitous. The strategy out here to try and enlist the help of the sheikhs, for the tribal leaders to come together began, for all practical purposes, almost a year ago. We have seen, the fruit of that effort has really become more apparent in the last few months, but it has been underway for quite some time with a lot of courageous leadership by the Anbaris themselves.

But they were very explicit in their comments to the president today that it was the additional, the presence of the additional U.S. forces, the Marines that came in, that helped cement the gains they felt they had made but were at risk and made the situation in their view one that is pretty stable as far as they’re concerned. General Lute.

GEN. LUTE: Yeah, I’d just add that the president last January announced an addition of 4,000 Marines to al Anbar, and they’ve been here serving since then. But the Anbaris themselves have added 20,000 Anbaris to the rolls of the Iraqi Security Forces. So you get a sense of order of magnitude here. Four thousand additional Americans perhaps served as a catalyst for something that actually started before they arrived, and helped us promote the addition of about 20,000 Anbaris to Iraqi Security Forces.

MR. HADLEY: This is not serendipity. If you remember the president’s speech January of last year, he focused on two things. Reinforcements into Baghdad to deal with sectarian violence, and reinforcements to Anbar to take advantage of the opportunities that he saw emerging and that had been worked on. So this was part of the plan, and an essential part of the plan that he outlined in January of last year.

AP: THE GAO BACKS DOWN

Originally, it was reported that Iraq failed to meet 13 of the 18 benchmarks.

Advisers Tell Bush to Stand Pat on Iraq
Sep 4, 7:49 PM (ET)
By MATTHEW LEE and ANNE GEARAN

Also Tuesday, the Government Accountability Office, Congress' investigative and auditing arm, reported that Iraq has failed to meet 11 of its 18 political and security goals.

The study was slightly more upbeat than initially planned. After receiving substantial resistance from the White House, the GAO determined that four benchmarks - instead of two - had been partially met.

But the GAO stuck with its original contention that only three goals out of the 18 had been fully achieved. The goals met include establishing joint security stations in Baghdad, ensuring minority rights in the Iraqi legislature and creating support committees for the Baghdad security plan.

U.S. Comptroller David Walker said the GAO did not soften its report due to pressure from the administration and reached its conclusions on its own.

A TIMELINE FROM PETRAEUS

He's said this before but this is the latest one. From an inteview he gave to ABC:

As for the duration, U.S. troops will remain in Iraq. The top commander said he sees this as a "traditional counterinsurgency," which would typically last a decade.

So, it's about 5.5 more years. On the question of withdrawal, he only mentioned the strain on our ground forces:

"The surge will run its course. There are limits to what our military can provide, so, my recommendations have to be informed by — not driven by — but they have to be informed by the strain we have put on our military services," Gen. David Petraeus said in the interview at Camp Victory in Baghdad. "That has to be a key factor in what I will recommend."

Here's where Petraeus seems to LIE:

"Eight of the past 11 weeks have seen the number of incidents, the number of attacks, come down, and to the point that they reached a level that's about the lowest in well over a year, I think," he said. "Civilian casualties [are] still certainly too high. But again, pretty substantial progress, and certainly, trending very much in the right direction."

As far as I've found, this simply isn't true (here and here). Petraeus also said Syria was doing more to prevent Al Qaeda operatives from sneaking in to Iraq and provided a tidbit for the wingnut morons who think it's ALL Al Qaeda, ALL the time:

"We believe that there have been fewer suicide bombers coming through Syria, and we are cautious about this assessment, but we do think that the Syrians may have been taking more active steps against al Qaeda, which is understandable," Petraeus said. "I mean, if al Qaeda were ever to succeed in Iraq, the next thing they'd do is turn … [to] Damascus. I can assure you."

YA GOTTA LUV 'EM

The wingnuts made several great comedy sites, like The Editors, possible here's just one reason why. I was listening to Tammy "The Shrill" Bruce tonight and it wasn't just an ordinary show, it was "A Best Of.." show. Tammy put her economist hat on and decided that the sub-prime loan problem is due to ... ILLEGAL ALIENS. At least she didn't say it was the GAY ILLEGAL ALIENS!

THE AIKEN SOLUTION

A long time ago in another war far, far away, Sen. George Aiken recommended that we declare victory and go home. I'm getting the sense that Pres. Fredo may be about to use that advice. On his recent PR trip to Iraq, he said:

"Gen. [David] Petraeus and Ambassador [Ryan] Crocker tell me if the kind of success we're now seeing continues, it will be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces," Bush said during remarks at Al Asad Air Base in Anbar province.

He then went on to blatantly misrepresent the anti-war movement by warning them that there would be no "quick" withdrawal. There are several things that are odd about the latest BS meme. For one, we've been told for quite some time that things were going great in Iraq (Teh Skoolz! Teh Skoolz!), so why couldn't we have drawn down over 2 years ago? Another odd thing is that we know they've been lying about the progress in Iraq, so is this just a fig leaf to justify drawing down? Atrios thinks something like that may be going on and I tend to agree.

RUSSELL KIRK GETS IT

Kirk was a leading conservative intellectual and his book The Conservative Mind (1953) can be considered the beginning of the revival of the conservative movement in America. I've been reading an intellectual biography of Kirk, subtly titled RUSSELL KIRK, by James E. Person. On page 27, I found this interesting quote:

"There is nothing more conservative than conservation" - Russell Kirk

I've noted before that Kirk would probably be uncomfortable with the neo-cons and this statement confirms that.

SOURCE: The Baltimore Sun, May 4, 1970

FUDGING THE NUMBERS

There is almost no limit to the lying the criminal Bush regime will do to make it seem it is correct about Iraq.

Via Kevin Drum, I learn that the DoD has been busy fudging the deaths due to sectarian violence (from NSN):

There were significant revisions to the way the Pentagon’s reports measure sectarian violence between its March 2007 report and its June 2007 report. The
original data for the five months before the surge began (September 2006 through
January 2007) indicated approximately 5,500 sectarian killings. In the revised data in the June 2007 report, those numbers had been adjusted to roughly 7,400 killings – a 25% increase. These discrepancies have the impact of making the sectarian violence appear significantly worse during the fall and winter of 2006 before the President’s “surge” began. [DOD, 11/2006 . 3/2007 . 6/2007 ]

Thanx to Andrew Sullivan, here's a graph of the changes:

THE NY TIMES ISN'T FALLING FOR IT

And by "it' I mean the wingnut BS that things are significantly better in Iraq. This is comparable to the findings of the AP and the LA Times and Reuters.

Civilian Death Toll Falls in Baghdad but Rises Across Iraq

By JAMES GLANZ
Published: September 2, 2007

...figures provided to The New York Times by an Interior Ministry official who asked to remain anonymous indicated that 2,318 civilians died violently in the country in August, compared with 1,980 in July.

WHO???

I learn from Jane at Firedoglake that Lanny Davis, one of the beltway elite and nominal liberal Democrat, is supporting Ted Olsen to be the new Attorney General. I recall the name from David Brock's terrific book, The Republican Noise Machine but I don't recall the details. Fortunately, Digby hasn't forgotten and let's us know that Olsen was at least knee-deep in the American Spectator's infamous Arkansas Project. The Project was funded by alcoholic billionaire extremist Richard Mellon Scaife and did its best to destroy Bill Clinton.

GLOBAL WARMING: THE POPE GETS IT

(Fats Limbaugh and other gasbags don't)

Pope Urges Young to Care for Planet
Sep 2, 4:14 PM (ET)
By NICOLE WINFIELD

LORETO, Italy (AP) - The planet risks irreversible decline from environmentally unsustainable development, Pope Benedict XVI warned Sunday, urging young Catholics to take the lead in caring for the Earth and its precious resources.

"Before it's too late, we need to make courageous choices that will recreate a strong alliance between man and Earth," Benedict said in his homily. "We need a decisive 'yes' to care for creation and a strong commitment to reverse those trends that risk making the situation of decay irreversible."

Under Benedict, the Vatican has been taking steps toward greater environmental sustainability. It has joined a reforestation project aimed at offsetting its CO2 emissions, and has also said it was installing solar cells on the roof of its main auditorium.

I'M DATING MYSELF HERE...

but I clearly recall that the GOP was supposed to be the Party of Law and Order (and I don't mean Freddie the Hutt).

Via Firedoglake, I learn that the Dept. of Justice has been woefully underfunded and understaffed.

JUSTICE DELAYED
Budget Crunch HitsU.S. Attorneys' Offices
Amid Antiterror Focus,Prosecutions Decline;Rep. Lewis Probe Slowed
By SCOT J. PALTROW
August 31, 2007; Page A1
Wall Street Journal

In the past few years, U.S. attorneys' offices around the country have been unable to fill vacancies. Lawyers sometimes can't travel to interview witnesses. Even funds for basic office needs such as photocopying documents and obtaining deposition transcripts have been cut, according to current and former officials.

Department of Justice data show the impact. Prosecutions are down overall, with large drops in categories such as drugs, violent crime and white-collar offenses.

The number of lawyers working in U.S. attorneys' offices fell 2.4% to 5,316 between Sept. 30, 2004, and Sept. 30, 2006, after rising in earlier years, according to official figures. The head count has continued to fall during the current year, according to the Justice Department.

ANOTHER WINGNUT GETS SLAMMED

Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) gets nailed by Wolf Blitzer for his idiotic smiley face comments about Iraq. AmericaBlog has the video, ThinkProgress has the video and transcript. Here's how lame Boustany is:

BOUSTANY: Well, I think what I mentioned earlier, Wolf, was the number of attacks. And, clearly, we have to look at all the metrics very carefully.

As the WSJ found, the number of attacks has been going UP, not DOWN.

MORE ON THE ANBAR AWAKENING

Ron at the Middle Eath Journal has a link this report that states the Sunnis in Anbar began turning against Al Qaeda LAST SEPTEMBER, MONTHS BEFORE THE SURGE WAS EVEN MENTIONED. Previously, I had read that the Sunnis started turning in December 2006.

Uneasy Alliance Is Taming One Insurgent Bastion
By KIRK SEMPLE
Published: April 29, 2007
NY Times

The turnabout began last September, when a federation of tribes in the Ramadi area came together as the Anbar Salvation Council to oppose the fundamentalist militants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.

Among the council’s founders were members of the Abu Ali Jassem tribe, based in a rural area of northern Ramadi. The tribe’s leader, Sheik Tahir Sabbar Badawie, said in a recent interview that members of his tribe had fought in the insurgency that kept the Americans pinned down on their bases in Anbar for most of the last four years.

“If your country was occupied by Iraq, would you fight?” he asked. “Enough said.”

But while the anti-American sheiks in Anbar and Al Qaeda both opposed the Americans, their goals were different. The sheiks were part of a relatively moderate front that sought to drive the Americans out of Iraq; some were also fighting to restore Sunni Arab power. But Al Qaeda wanted to go even further and impose a fundamentalist Islamic state in Anbar, a plan that many of the sheiks did not share.

Al Qaeda’s fighters began to use killing, intimidation and financial coercion to divide the tribes and win support for their agenda. They killed about 210 people in the Abu Ali Jassem tribe alone and kidnapped others, demanding ransoms as high as $65,000 per person, Sheik Badawie said.

For all the sheiks’ hostility toward the Americans, they realized that they had a bigger enemy, or at least one that needed to be fought first, as a matter of survival.