Poor, stupid neocons.  How can you still cling to ideology?  Ideology did not drive the country to Iraq.  WMDs? No. Saddam’s crimes? No again.  Democracy in the Middle East?  Nope.  Then what possibly could have caused these businessmen to mobilize the most powerful military machine the Earth has ever seen and travel 4,000 miles? 

                $

Well, well,
  What have we here from these two fellows?
What’s this? There were mistakes made?
Really?
Hmm…I see no mention of the 10’s of thousands of
grieving mothers, not to mention the U.S. troops
who died-at the young, tender years of their lives.
And, just what business is it of these two hypocrites what happens in Syria and Lebanon?
Oh, yeah…to remake the Middle East for ah…
democracy….bullshit!
To remake that area for, yup..Israel’s interests.
That is the truth.
Let me tell you something-the U.S., acting for the
neo-con’s over there, did not, repeat, did not go for the purpose of establishing democracy. Less and less people are believing that line.
Funny, Palestine, under The Israeli gun has elections, Iran has free elections. So, who are the neo-cons after? Those countries.
And, who is occupying a nation of another people?
Israel, with full U.S. support! Illegally, and may I add, Israel has defied around 70 U.N. resolutions. Yeah, yeah, I know your tired old line on that, ‘Well, the U.N. who needs ‘em..Blah
blah.”
  Look, cut the crap: you guys were wrong, you guys were part of the dis-information that led so many Americans to believe that the U.S. should invade Iraq. What did we get? Dead and maimed America young people, while you two, and your other friends, like Perle, Feith and Wolfowitz are enjoying life and bullshitting.
How about this fact:
No way can you face the truth if you are cornered;
for example, aside from the fact that neither you
nor the other neo-con’s kids and relatives
sign up to serve in the military, I will tell you this: A hell of a lot more people died since 2003
in Iraq than would have had killer Hussein been in power-you remember him-the U.S. supplied old Saddam with arms and intelligence when he made war against Iran- A country that never attacked another in many a year.
  Like Kissinger and his ilk, in my opinion, as a historian, you, along with the rest of the neo-con crew should be tried for urging and inciting hate
and war crimes. For a few things, anyway, like dropping bombs on cities and towns in Iraq.
Like Abu Graib. Like the British thuggery,against civilians, small boys even,
as we saw on tape. Like rendition.
Get outta here with your bull. Save it for the ignorant. Know what I mean?
Later Alligator

You know, sometimes it is almost impossible to know where to begin. Let’s start and hopefully end with Sullivan’s three mistakes.

1.The first was to over-estimate the competence of government, especially in extremely delicate areas like WMD intelligence.

Well fingerpointing is always the best defence of scoundrels.  Sullivan, of course, fails to mention the years of drumbeating for this sort of actions the Neo-Cons had been engaged in.  So, the story now becomes, “If we had know that our governmeent was incompetent then we would never have promulgated our Pollyanna attitudes towards starting a war.

2. The second error was narcissism. America’s power blinded many of us to the resentments that such power must necessarily provoke. Those resentments are often as deep among our global acquaintances as enemies - in fact, may be deeper.

It boggles the mind that anyone who professes to know anything about foreign policy, diplomatic, politcal history and/or sets themselves up as a promulgator of opinions on same, could make a statement like that.  Mr. Sullivan should shut his blog down based on that statement, alone.  How could anyone in cluding himself, take him seriously after such an admission.

Well, thanks, Mr. Sullivan, I am sure that those people who have lost their loved ones, both Iraqis and coalition forces are quite pleased that you have owned up to your narcissism. You would be better off crawling into a hole somewhere rather than having people’s grief compounded by this admission.

3. The final error was not taking culture seriously enough. Fukuyama is absolutely right to note the discrepancy between neoconservatism’s skepticism toward’s government’s ability to change culture at home and its naivete when it comes to complex, tribal, sectarian and un-Western cultures, like Iraq’s, abroad.

Duh, this is why it is called Foreign Policy.  It deals with people who are foreign politically and culturally.

Why don’t the Neo-Cons call a spade a spade and admit their whole theory was based on WW II movies. You know Liberate Bagdad, have the Boys throw some nylons and chocolates of the tanks and everything will be hunky-dory.

The nation building in Europe went as smoothly after WW2 because Europe was completely destroyed.  So much so that it experienced famine. Germany was bombed to rubble and most people had had enough of war and were more interested in finding something to eat.

Well, for what it is worth maybe you should have thought about the effects of the following: What would be the effect of occupying the seat of the Caliphate. What would be the effect of occupying the country where the Great Schism of Islam occured? What would be the effect of re-exposing the major split in the Umma.

How many of these Neo Cons had ever heard of the 6 Imams, or read the Koran even in translation.

Quite frankly, after exposing themselves as innocents abroad, one would think that Mr. Fukayama and Mr. Sullivan would keep their opinions to themselves for a while.

After the Vietnam War, the U.S. officials most responsible for that debacle first blamed the media. Then, after more time had elapsed, some meekly offered up their apologies.

Their words were much too little, much too late. And now we are beginning to see the same contrition over the Iraq mess.

I’ve said it before, half-jokingly, but now it occurs to me that we should get serious about it: Make the policy-makers fight the wars they champion.

The defense secretary and his six top subordinates, the national security adviser and his six top aides, and the chairmen of the Senate and House armed services committees all should have to serve in Army or Marine Corps rifle platoons for at least 30 days on any U.S. deployment that lasts more than three months.

Perhaps the law could even require the president of the United States to serve a week or two in the same capacity. And why not? All those people are replaceable.

If such a law were passed, I can assure you that the U.S. penchant for military adventurism would wane dramatically.

I’m glad that F—kyourmama, a “neocon intellectual” became enlightened, but he is just a bit too late!

There have been 2,480 coalition deaths and 2,276 Americans deaths, as of February 20, 2006.

“ DefenseWatch” released a secret Marine Corps report that determined that 80% of the 401 Marines killed in Iraq between April 2004 and June 2005 might have been saved if the Interceptor OTV body armor they were wearing was more effective. The Army has declined to comment on the report because doing so could aid the enemy, an Army spokesman has repeatedly said.

More than 100,000 Iraqis have died during the American-led occupation according to a study posted on The Lancet medical journal’s website. Previous estimates of the number of Iraqis killed during the American-led air strikes and occupation has ranged from 10,000 to 30,000—“MORE OR LESS” according to Bush.

The report in a British journal is based on the work of teams from Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. The authors acknowledge that the data cited in the study might be of “limited precision.”

However, similar methodology was used in the late 1990s to calculate the number of deaths from the war in Kosovo.

The information was obtained as Iraqi interviewers surveyed 808 families, consisting of 7,868 people, in 33 different “clusters” or neighborhoods spread across the country.
In each case, they asked how many births and deaths there had been in the home since January 2002.

That information was then compared with the death rates in each neighborhood in the 15 months before the invasion that toppled president Saddam Hussein, adjusted for the different time frames, and extrapolated to cover the entire 24.4 million population of Iraq.

  $$$$$$$    Whose counting now?  $$$$$$$

The cost of the Iraq war could top two trillion dollars, far above the White House’s pre-war projections, when long-term costs such as lifetime health care for thousands of wounded U.S soldiers are included.  We are spending $177 million per day, $7.4 million per hour and $122,820 per minute.

“Whether you are a critic or supporter of President Bush’s policy in Iraq, two points are clear: Iraq was a war of choice, and the United States is bearing virtually all of the cost,” said John Podesta, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress. “At a time when there are many competing security priorities- ranging from strengthening our conventional military to securing weapons grade nuclear material around the world, to protecting our ports and chemical plants from terrorist attack to putting more police on the street, it’s important to recognize the opportunity cost of the choice to invade Iraq at the time and in the manner that we did.”

Columbia University economist Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard lecturer Linda Bilmes included in their study disability payments for the 16,000 wounded U.S. soldiers, about 20 percent of whom suffer serious brain or spinal injuries.  And we’re not out yet—so there will unfortunately be plenty other seriously wounded soldiers that will require a lifetime of medical care. 
They said U.S. taxpayers will be burdened with costs that linger long after U.S. troops withdraw.

Unemployment in Iraq is 60 percent.  Massive unemployment creates a disenfranchised population who are eagerly enlisted into the insurgency—they have lost everything and are willing to fight to the death to remove U.S. occupation from their country.  Working on the infrastructure is almost impossible because of attacks by insurgents. Incidents have increased from 150 a week to over 700 a week in the last year.

Little is said about Afghanistan, but recently more than twenty people were killed and twenty wounded in a suicide bomb attack in the southern Afghan town of Spin Boldak, bordering Pakistan. Earlier, a suicide bomber hurled himself in front of an Afghan army vehicle in the provincial capital, Kandahar, 70 miles to the north, killing three Afghan soldiers and two civilians.

                                    VOLUNTARY ARMY BUSH’S BEST FRIEND

I am convinced that if there was no voluntary army but a draft the same people who so proudly impale a sticker saying “support the troops” would be defecating in their pants if they thought “their” little Tommy or Betsy could be drafted.  The streets again would be filled with the now apathetic youth, or had no time to remove their iPods to cast a vote in the 2004 election.  However, these young Americans would suddenly come to life, after receiving notification from the military that their BUTTOCKS ARE ON THE LINE!  But now they can remain drowsy knowing that the all-volunteer army is doing the dirty work.  And Bush and his advisors are well aware of this; and since they themselves evaded military service (Cheney’s five military deferments—and Bush’s non-service in the National Guard) and are basically cowards, they will not “readily” reinstitute the draft for fear of a nation wide civil rebellion. 

But eventually they will have to risk civil disorder, in order to fill the ranks of our thinly stretched military if they plan on invading Iran.  How could this beleaguered voluntary army who is now serving four and five tours of duty be furthered stretched into three simultaneous offensives on three fronts—Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan—and then what would hinder a terrorist incident from occurring in a fourth country?  Maintaining a global empire is a messy job!

            AND NOW IRAN

  United States is gearing up for an attack on Iran, Bush will never mention oil as a reason for going to war. As in the case of Iraq, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) will be cited as the principal justification for an American assault. “We will not tolerate the construction of a nuclear weapon [by Iran],” is the way President Bush put it in a much-quoted 2003 statement. But just as the failure to discover illicit weapons in Iraq undermined the administration’s use of WMD as the paramount reason for its invasion, so its claim that an attack on Iran will be justified because of its alleged nuclear potential.

Iran occupies a strategic location on the north side of the Persian Gulf, it is in a position to threaten oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates, which together possess more than half of the world’s known oil reserves. Iran also sits adjacent to the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which, daily, 40% of the world’s oil exports pass. In addition, Iran is becoming a major supplier of oil and natural gas to China, India, and Japan, thereby giving Tehran additional clout in world affairs. It is these geopolitical dimensions of energy, as much as Iran’s potential to export significant quantities of oil to the United States that ultimately determines our government’s military strategy.

Iran’s nuclear facilities are scattered throughout the entire country. To launch an aerial attack, you would need many more fighter jets than were used in Iraq.  How many civilians would be annihilated by missiles that don’t always have that pin-point accuracy to reach just the right target, and what further insurgencies will an attack like that incite.  In addition, if these nuclear facilities were attacked, military strategists say that steps would need to be taken in order to prevent large-scale nuclear contamination from the resulting damage done to the reactors.

Bush, is not willing to rule out the use of force against the mullahs.

Mr. Sullivan, the last sentence of your article evoked the following in me, “I wish Mr. Bush had written this article.”  My husband and I lived in Yemen in the mid 70’s and so have an understanding, somewhat, of Arab culture and people.  From the beginning of what has become this Mideast debacle, to the present, it was and is evident to us that our government evidences a shocking non-understanding or misunderstanding of Arab culture, tradition, and history. And that was at our peril and continues to be so.

What a load of dreck!  So these two boneheaded neofascists are admitting they were wrong.  I suppose we should be happy that ANY of these admit to being stupid.  But Sullivan is trying to claim things are “beginning to turn around”?  What kind of mea culpa is it when these two yahoos make no apology for their roles in pushing military adventurism?  This war and the entire Bush administration has been a complete disaster.  What we get is more half baked nonsense.

I think each and every one of these right wing bozos should be tried for war crimes.  Then we will see how much traction their self serving mea culpas have.