All responsibility for unfinished, unsucessful or incomplete missions in Iraq falls squarely on the US. We are and have been the occupying force and we have held complete authority for the past four years. If its broken, it’s because we broke it! If it hasn’t been fulfilled it would be because we didn’t want to spend the money or we don’t want the Iraqi people to have too much comfort.
Our intent was to run the Iraqi’s out of their country and we are partially succesful. Our desire is to have rule over the OIL.

Funny you should ask Dennis.

It brings to mind something I read in an academic journal, a piece by Laura Nader. (I think, I’d have to double check if anyone is interested). One of the observations that she addressed was how occupying nations seem to take on the political mentality of the nations they occupy.

In the article, she was referencing the occupation of Iraq by the US, and I remember thinking that the US (regime) had indeed taken on multiple characteristics of the regime that they set out to destroy in Iraq. The corruption of the Saddam regime, the oppression of the civilians in general, and overall, the same tyranny and dictatorship that was the rule of Saddam, was duplicated by the US in it’s occupation.

But, they didn’t just duplicate the dictatorship there in Iraq, but they’ve installed it here as well!!!

Still, I’m not sure who copied who, as far as dysfunction goes. Saddams was a tyrannical and brutal regime, for anyone that he targeted. But, they didn’t have this level of sectarian strife…not even close. There were plenty of Shia in his administration. It would have been politically stupid for him NOT to have them. Besides that, Iraq’s was at least a secular regime under Saddam. So, while the corruption may be a shared characteristic of the two regimes, the sectarian and civil strife is definitely something that our own dictators ordered and exported.

And so yeah, it’s kind of ironic to hear about the woes of the current Iraqi government, since it seems to mirror our own.

Actually, I think they might be in better shape, since they apparently haven’t had a chance to turn them all into robots, like what we apparently have in our own Congress.

I’m almost jealous. So far, they’re the only ones who’ve had to guts to stand up to the Gangsters in DC, even if it’s just by saying NO, and refusing to give in.

Our Congress caved-in to the same bunch 7 years ago, and they’ve been holding us hostage ever since.

Gee what a surprise.
A totally clueless person is allowed to commit US forces to an invasion of a country that was no threat to the security of the US, totally disrupt all operations of that country and with no sensible plan of restoring any semblance of control.
Then, even after he had been warned by the man who single-handedly re-invented the US military that things were going to hell, he refused to take any effective action. Instead, he lied. Granted, lying is his forte.
But he lied all the way to the ‘06 election when he realized that his Party was going to lose in a big way. Then he pretended (there is that lying again) to set things up for a different approach.
And now that that approach is not achieving all of its goals, goals that he set, he wants to alter the report.
Thankfully he wasn’t able to change the whole report.
And the Democrat’s are standing firm for a withdrawal timetable. Even if he caved in and agreed, he’d renege.
The Democrat’s in Congress had best start giving serious consideration to drawing up Articles of Impeachment against the Shootist and then the Shrub.
Only after both of them are out of office will there be any chance of making a withdrawal of American forces.