I saw this from Juan Cole:

“If the Democrats cannot prevail in withdrawing before Bush goes out of office (and they cannot), and if they then rapidly draw down the troops on taking office in 2009, they face the real prospect of a “Gerald Ford meltdown” of the sort that occurred in 1975 when the North Vietnamese and their VC allies took over South Vietnam.

. . . Could 2010 look for Iraq like 1975 looked in Vietnam? Yes. I just do not see evidence that either the new Iraqi political class or the Iraqi security forces are likely to have the maturity to avoid a conflagration when the US military withdraws.

. . . But in all likelihood, when the Democratic president pulls US troops out in summer of 2009, all hell is going to break loose. The consequences may include even higher petroleum prices than we have seen recently, which at some point could bring back stagflation or very high rates of inflation.

In other words, the Democratic president risks being Fordized when s/he withdraws from Iraq, by the aftermath. A one-term president associated with humiliation abroad and high inflation at home? Maybe I should say, Carterized. The Republican Party could come back strong in 2012 and then dominate politics for decades, if that happened.

. . . As for Iraq itself, the best hope for the Dems may be that Gen. Petraeus actually succeeds, over the next year, in significantly reducing ethnic tensions. It is a slim reed to hold onto, as they recognize.

. . . I’m a severe skeptic on the likelihood of anything that looks like success in Iraq. But I don’t think career public servants such as Ryan Crocker and David Petraeus are acting as partisan Republicans in their Iraq efforts. I think they both are sincere, experienced men attempting to retrieve what they can for America from Bush’s catastrophe. They may as well try, since the Democrats can’t over-rule Bush and get the troops out, anyway. If the troops are there, they may as well at least be deployed intelligently, which is what Gen. Petraeus is doing. I wish them well in their Herculean labors. Because if they fail, I have a sinking feeling that we are all going down with them, including the next Democratic president. And their success is a long shot.” http://www.juancole.com/2007/0…..-save.html

Dems in Congress must do whatever it takes, even through impeachment, to decisively change the course NOW. And if it all rapidly goes to being far worse in Iraq, it happens under the asshole’s watch. And if it goes to a far worse hell under Bush’s watch and Americans find that unacceptable and blame the Dems, then they can put another authoritarian Republican in the presidency to try to finish it. If it gets a lot worse in Iraq as a result of a Congressional intervention on Bush before he leaves office and a Democrat goes on to be elected president in ‘08, a ‘Gerald Ford meltdown’ will be averted and Republicans would likely be far less able to claim the heart and souls of the public for years to come. But by Congress interveneing now with impeachment if necessary, at the very least, we will provide some long overdue relief to those and their families who most deserve it.

Very well said. You truly give Food for Thought. Bb

Stop whining. Use it, or shut up.

You said it, Scarecrow, and how.

I would only add that if any Member of Congress feels him or herself unable to “use it” – that is, the inherent power the Constitution provides their branch of government, including impeachment – then the only honorable course of action for that oathbreaker is to immediately resign his or her seat in our federal legislature in order to make way for an American who does believe in our Constitution and the freedoms and rights it enshrines.

http://thetimtimes.com/?p=63

Enjoy.

Lost in all this is the potentially positive good will we will reclaim with the rest of the world if we impeach. It will show that our system can correct itself, and that democracy works. It might also help to enlist other countries to be more forthcoming in straightening out Iraq and helping us in capturing the criminals like the police problem it is. It will put the blame on Bush where it belongs.

Yes, we must show our system works or it won’t matter if George retires peacefully, it will be too late to prove our system is more than a facade, a show.

And, I think our political leaders understand this and are preparing for it. Sorry Nancy. Leadership comes in many forms. One is sacrifice.

Still, the question of timing is important. I think it will take a while to take down Dick and in the spring, after a Dem nominee is pretty much decided, it will be time to take on George.

Others may disagree, but that’s Democracy.

Edwards ‘08

Who in my party is calling for impeachment?

I want them to build their case and impeach Cheney, so they can replace him with someone else before moving on to impeaching Bush.

They’re destroying America.

So, they have decided not to try.

I think every single Congressman and Senator who isn’t doing everything in his power to impeach the president should be indicted for perjury; lying while taking the oath of office.

I actually agree with quite a bit of that. The “stop whining” and “shut up” parts in particular. The “You have nothing left to lose except … respect, ours and your own,” I have to say, that battle’s over. Never mind. I thought scarecrows shied away from playing with fire, and I applaud this one for calling it in on his own vegetable patch. Burlap Face is onto something here. What the electorate wants is a pointless impeachment battle. Do it now! For the sake of the 2008 election. For America’s future. Reveal the crimes of the regime!

http://www.julescrittenden.com…..h-him-now/

Shredder @ 119

Why is everybody (except a couple commenters above) calling it a WAR? This is a really, really stupid mistake. There is NO WAR IN IRAQ – it is an OCCUPATION.

Sorry to yell about this but until we reframe this thing we are the ones failing more than anyone else. I want to make this point especially to all those who write the titles to posts around here. Id like to see the word “occupation” in every blog post about Iraq.

Do this reframing job and we’re halfway there. How do you “win” an occupation?

FRAME: OCCUPATION. NOT A WAR!

It would be nice if the leadership in Congress would put out a memo to this effect for the Democrats to follow.

It is an occupation with all the legal baggage that goes along with it which is why the administration was so quick to hand over “sovereignty” in 2004. The only thing they forgot is that if the occupier calls all the shots and rules the country through a puppet regime, it’s still an occupation.

We have to get better at calling this what it is and was always intended to be.

ILLEGAL OCCUPATION (don’t go forgetting yer proper adjectives)