In fact it looks like the opposite is happening doug……..

Good analysis. Here is what I think will happen next:

Maliki government at Sadr’s urging will call for immediate and complete withdrawal of U.S. troops (in today’s news). This will put Bush admin in the untenable position of having to argue for staying in Iraq when Iraqis, the U.S. public and U.S. congress and the int’l community all want them to leave. Nevertheless, they will make the argument that U.S. sets its own timetable and will not leave until certain conditions are met (essentially that a “unity” gov’t is put in place).
The war will get even hotter, as the U.S. begins to use Kurdish troops to go after Sadr’s Mahdi army. The proxy war will also heat up between U.S. and Iran as Iran begins to heavily arm a Shia insurgency and starts to send in a larger number of its Revolutionary Guard to act as advisors.
Our reasons for going to war will change. To win support at home, Bush will couch the war in terms of a fight between democracy and the spread of fundamentalist Islam (and nukes) by Iran (Al Qaeda in Iraq is forgotten). We will hear the Cold War policy of containment and domino theory worked in here. Bush will say that the Maliki gov’t has been compromised and a new “interim” gov’t needs to be installed.
Suddenly this is no longer a war that can be fought with 150,000 troops; this is now a 500,000 troop war. The case has to be made to the public for such an expansion and we will see the nuke card played (“Iran has nukes and is intent on spreading them throughout the region. They want the Islamic bomb to use against the West!”). This of course is the only way to unite a Congress and U.S. public behind a greatly escalated war.

I wait with baited breath…….

And I’m not a bullshit neocon anything. I have done my two tours of Iraq and am far more familiar with the country and the bad guys than a lot of commenters. If we impeach bush this goes away……Until then I’ll be here to debunk crap about broken supply lines and Al Sadr running Iraq……..

Sounds like Caelestis has been listening to William “The Grin” Kristol and the rest of his neocon armchair warriors. If you want a fair idea of what’s going to happen in Iraq read “The Savage War For Peace” by Alistair Horne. While there are some parallels between Iraq and Viet Nam (my alma mater) the parallels between Iraq and Algeria (ever heard of the place, Caelestis?) are telling. Algeria came close to causing an army-wide mutiny in France. Americans have never understood the concept of martyrdom in the Islamic world (or anything else, apparently), even with all the Christian martyr tales from imperial Rome. The Grin may want an American imperial force in the Middle East but he’s going to end up with an RPG up his ass.

No I just spent one year doing convoy ops in Iraq……..I’m pretty familiar with the supply lines and the Mehdi army. I also know that the Western desert is an alternative to MSR Tampa, no bridges, no cover for bad guys and our supply vehicles can ride unimpeded out there. When Tampa was threatened back in 2004, that is what we did.

but hey don’t listen to a guy that was there…….

Any deal to leave Iraq needs to be brokered by him [Sadr], so we can drive south.

What has the last year (at least) been, but a lot of wasted effort spent in trying to deny this plain fact?

Some argue that Thatcher was a Reagan toady, as is Blair to Bush.

Maliki government at Sadr’s urging will call for immediate and complete withdrawal of U.S. troops (in today’s news). This will put Bush admin in the untenable position of having to argue for staying in Iraq when Iraqis, the U.S. public and U.S. congress and the int’l community all want them to leave. Nevertheless, they will make the argument that U.S. sets its own timetable and will not leave until certain conditions are met (essentially that a “unity” gov’t is put in place).
The war will get even hotter, as the U.S. begins to use Kurdish troops to go after Sadr’s Mahdi army. The proxy war will also heat up between U.S. and Iran as Iran begins to heavily arm a Shia insurgency and starts to send in a larger number of its Revolutionary Guard to act as advisors.
Our reasons for going to war will change. To win support at home, Bush will couch the war in terms of a fight between democracy and the spread of fundamentalist Islam (and nukes) by Iran (Al Qaeda in Iraq is forgotten). We will hear the Cold War policy of containment and domino theory worked in here. Bush will say that the Maliki gov’t has been compromised and a new “interim” gov’t needs to be installed.
Suddenly this is no longer a war that can be fought with 150,000 troops; this is now a 500,000 troop war. The case has to be made to the public for such an expansion and we will see the nuke card played (“Iran has nukes and is intent on spreading them throughout the region. They want the Islamic bomb to use against the West!”). This of course is the only way to unite a Congress and U.S. public behind a greatly escalated war.

SteveAudio @ 77
Not trying to hijack the thread, but I just got back from visiting Jane, she looked pretty good, had a big smile on her face.
——————
Valley Girl @ 81
Thanks, Steve. Did you adjust the track lighting?
——————
SteveAudio @ 86
Actually the lighting was very subdued, so no, I didn’t.

Sheesh.
——————
Valley Girl @ 90
Sorry, no offense meant. I missed the origination of this, and RGB had to explain why he kept saying this in his comments. RBG’s translation was – hetero version of “I luv you man”.
——————
SteveAudio @
92
None taken! It’s actually all quite funny.

Are you all channeling the piece from Terms of Endearment about guys named Steve?

I didn’t see the need to get that precise for discussion here but I’ll stand corrected on the point that there is more than one supply line, if that’s what you’re saying.