Monday, March 13, 2006
How can US be neutral in Iraqi civil war?
MotherJones: "The other day, Rumsfeld mentioned that he would prefer to avoid a "civil war" in Iraq—right, obviously—but that if one did "break out" (presumably he means if things got really, really bad), then the US would stay out of it, letting Iraqi security forces "deal with it." That's not exactly comforting, and ignores the fact that US forces might not be able to stay neutral. Gary Hart recently worried that if "all-out civil war breaks out, we could lose our army. If Sunnis and Shiites take to the streets by the thousands, it could literally be impossible to get the soldiers out." Oh well... since Bush just laughed it up at the Gridiron Club and he told us w/o having his growing nose poke a reporter's eye out that: " I am optimistic the Iraqi people will overcome the challenges they face, and my optimism is based on the reality on the ground. I know we are going to succeed if we don't lose our will.'' Well, that settles it: if Bush says all is good in the Middle East (despite evidence and confirmation by the Iraqi govt of Shiite death squads operating out of the govt, and this and this), then I guess I'll go back to burying my head in the all important citizen issue of who will win American Idol?