Is Sen.
Lindsey Graham (R) South Carolina crackers over the generals in Iraq?He seems to be going ga-ga over Gen.
Petraeus, who does the bidding of King George.
Bush that is.
Graham has the unmitigated gall and temerity to attempt to justify his lack of support for an amendment that would give our troops adequate rest between deployments.
The new measure was proposed by his senate colleague Jim Webb (D) West Virginia.
Graham's explanation for not supporting the Webb measure is, he doesn't want to micro manage the war.
Webb's son happens to be deployed in Iraq.
Perhaps Sen.
Graham detected a hint of self-interest in Sen.
Webb's proposal.
It is incorrect to call what is going on in Iraq a war.
It's an occupation with complications.
Our soldiers are in the middle of fierce internecine fighting.
Those who should know, refer to it as a civil war.
Combine that with al-qaeda-in-Iraq, an unaffiliated branch of al-qaeda central, that is dedicated to creating havoc in Iraq and you have a snapshot of what is going on there.
Some soldiers have been deployed in Iraq over four times, with hardly any rest between deployments.
Ironically those who claim to support the troops most, like Sen.
Graham, can't seem to take the extra step of insuring that they are properly equipped, suffiently paid and adequately rested between visits.
As Forrest Gump would say, "Support is, as support does.
"Claiming to support the troops and actually supporting them are two distinctly different things.
President Bush, with whom Sen.
Graham appears to be in lockstep, liberally heaps praise upon our troops, while concomitantly denying them the essential life saving equipment that they so desperately need.
Soldiers are still forced to jury-rig their vehicles, which lacks life saving armor plating.
The lengths and frequency of their deployments indicates a level of disingenuousness on the President's part.
Upon their return home, they have difficulty meeting the eligibility requirements for full medical coverage and care.
The Veteran's Administration fights soldiers tooth and nail over classifications, which would allow them to get the medical and psychological attention that they so desperately need.
The support that Mr.
Bush talks about would appear to be lacking where it counts most, aftercare.
Sen.
Graham mimics President Bush in asking his senate colleagues to wait until General David Petraeus reports on Iraq in September.
He views any actions that the senate might take before that time to be premature, knowing full well, that not much will have changed by then.
The problem with his position is that lives are at stake.
Of course we're not talking about anybody that Sen.
Graham needs to really care about.
After all no relatives of his have their lives on the line in Iraq.
Sen.
Graham has either bought into George Bush's big lie, "We're fighting them over there, so we don't have to fight them here," or he actually believes a military victory can be achieved in Iraq.
In either case, he's deluded himself.
In truth and in fact, we are fighting them over there because, over there is where the oil is.
How else can one explain diverting attention from Afghanistan, where the enemies of America sought and received safe haven, to Iraq, where al-qaeda didn't exist before our arrival?There's nothing in Afghanistan worth co-opting that hasn't already been co-opted, including their poppy fields.
It doesn't appear that we are any more successful in our efforts to fight drugs, than we've been in fighting terrorism.
What we have done through the failed policies of George Dubya Bush and those who blindly support him, like Sen.
Graham, who obviously must be crackers, is helped in the recruitment of a whole new crop of terrorists.
Because of our incursion in Iraq, we have provided them with a more fertile training ground than they had in Afghanistan.
Our continued presence in Iraq serves as a magnet for every jihadist wannabe and suicide bomber there is, yet Graham insists we remain mired in Iraq until September, to wait for Petraeus' report.
I can envision the report's headline,"More Dead, More Wounded" and Some Progress" to show for it.
The so-called surge is in full operation, with their primary goal being to secure Baghdad, yet the so-called Green Zone has been hit more times than a piñata.
The hits have been devastating.
Graham joins a long list of Presidential sycophants, like crazy Joe Lieberman, who thinks it might be constructive to launch a war with Iran, right about now.
Neither Lieberman nor Graham have called for us to check Saudia Arabia, though eleven of the nineteen Nine-Eleven highjackers came from there.
An overwhelming number of the jihadist and suicide bombers are Saudis.
Sen.
Graham is nothing more than a hack politician, with the patina of respectability, pandering to his conservative base.
The, we aren't the cut and run crowd.
Sometimes the better part of valor is to fight and run away, so you can fight another day.
When informed that Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki said Iraq can begin to stand up when the Americans leave his country, Sen.
Graham said that wasn't what he really meant.
According to Graham, if we were to leave Iraq precipitously, chaos would result.
The truth of the matter is, chaos exists there now.
Whenever we leave Iraq, and at some point we must, chaos will result.
There is nothing we can do that will insure that is not the case.
We destroyed Iraq's capability to defend their selves.
It is unrealistic for us to expect them to be able to on our timetable.
Their attitude seems to be, America created this mess and it's up to America to fix it.
Despite Graham's worst fears, as long as we continue to remain in Iraq it will be at great peril.
To not support some kind of sensible end to this quagmire, is to betray us and the troops in the worst way.
For this reason I suggest in the strongest terms Graham must be crackers.
Lindsey Graham (R) South Carolina crackers over the generals in Iraq?He seems to be going ga-ga over Gen.
Petraeus, who does the bidding of King George.
Bush that is.
Graham has the unmitigated gall and temerity to attempt to justify his lack of support for an amendment that would give our troops adequate rest between deployments.
The new measure was proposed by his senate colleague Jim Webb (D) West Virginia.
Graham's explanation for not supporting the Webb measure is, he doesn't want to micro manage the war.
Webb's son happens to be deployed in Iraq.
Perhaps Sen.
Graham detected a hint of self-interest in Sen.
Webb's proposal.
It is incorrect to call what is going on in Iraq a war.
It's an occupation with complications.
Our soldiers are in the middle of fierce internecine fighting.
Those who should know, refer to it as a civil war.
Combine that with al-qaeda-in-Iraq, an unaffiliated branch of al-qaeda central, that is dedicated to creating havoc in Iraq and you have a snapshot of what is going on there.
Some soldiers have been deployed in Iraq over four times, with hardly any rest between deployments.
Ironically those who claim to support the troops most, like Sen.
Graham, can't seem to take the extra step of insuring that they are properly equipped, suffiently paid and adequately rested between visits.
As Forrest Gump would say, "Support is, as support does.
"Claiming to support the troops and actually supporting them are two distinctly different things.
President Bush, with whom Sen.
Graham appears to be in lockstep, liberally heaps praise upon our troops, while concomitantly denying them the essential life saving equipment that they so desperately need.
Soldiers are still forced to jury-rig their vehicles, which lacks life saving armor plating.
The lengths and frequency of their deployments indicates a level of disingenuousness on the President's part.
Upon their return home, they have difficulty meeting the eligibility requirements for full medical coverage and care.
The Veteran's Administration fights soldiers tooth and nail over classifications, which would allow them to get the medical and psychological attention that they so desperately need.
The support that Mr.
Bush talks about would appear to be lacking where it counts most, aftercare.
Sen.
Graham mimics President Bush in asking his senate colleagues to wait until General David Petraeus reports on Iraq in September.
He views any actions that the senate might take before that time to be premature, knowing full well, that not much will have changed by then.
The problem with his position is that lives are at stake.
Of course we're not talking about anybody that Sen.
Graham needs to really care about.
After all no relatives of his have their lives on the line in Iraq.
Sen.
Graham has either bought into George Bush's big lie, "We're fighting them over there, so we don't have to fight them here," or he actually believes a military victory can be achieved in Iraq.
In either case, he's deluded himself.
In truth and in fact, we are fighting them over there because, over there is where the oil is.
How else can one explain diverting attention from Afghanistan, where the enemies of America sought and received safe haven, to Iraq, where al-qaeda didn't exist before our arrival?There's nothing in Afghanistan worth co-opting that hasn't already been co-opted, including their poppy fields.
It doesn't appear that we are any more successful in our efforts to fight drugs, than we've been in fighting terrorism.
What we have done through the failed policies of George Dubya Bush and those who blindly support him, like Sen.
Graham, who obviously must be crackers, is helped in the recruitment of a whole new crop of terrorists.
Because of our incursion in Iraq, we have provided them with a more fertile training ground than they had in Afghanistan.
Our continued presence in Iraq serves as a magnet for every jihadist wannabe and suicide bomber there is, yet Graham insists we remain mired in Iraq until September, to wait for Petraeus' report.
I can envision the report's headline,"More Dead, More Wounded" and Some Progress" to show for it.
The so-called surge is in full operation, with their primary goal being to secure Baghdad, yet the so-called Green Zone has been hit more times than a piñata.
The hits have been devastating.
Graham joins a long list of Presidential sycophants, like crazy Joe Lieberman, who thinks it might be constructive to launch a war with Iran, right about now.
Neither Lieberman nor Graham have called for us to check Saudia Arabia, though eleven of the nineteen Nine-Eleven highjackers came from there.
An overwhelming number of the jihadist and suicide bombers are Saudis.
Sen.
Graham is nothing more than a hack politician, with the patina of respectability, pandering to his conservative base.
The, we aren't the cut and run crowd.
Sometimes the better part of valor is to fight and run away, so you can fight another day.
When informed that Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki said Iraq can begin to stand up when the Americans leave his country, Sen.
Graham said that wasn't what he really meant.
According to Graham, if we were to leave Iraq precipitously, chaos would result.
The truth of the matter is, chaos exists there now.
Whenever we leave Iraq, and at some point we must, chaos will result.
There is nothing we can do that will insure that is not the case.
We destroyed Iraq's capability to defend their selves.
It is unrealistic for us to expect them to be able to on our timetable.
Their attitude seems to be, America created this mess and it's up to America to fix it.
Despite Graham's worst fears, as long as we continue to remain in Iraq it will be at great peril.
To not support some kind of sensible end to this quagmire, is to betray us and the troops in the worst way.
For this reason I suggest in the strongest terms Graham must be crackers.