The War Is Over

"Bush has lost the country on this. It's not the media's fault, not the Democrats', not the military's. It's Bush's, and his sad excuse for a defense secretary.
---Andrew Sullivan---
Lets make it clear, I opposed this war from the beginning. Not because I like terrorists, not because I thought Saddam was an enlightened leader but because, like Vietnam, it was never a winnable war.
There were several real reasons for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, none of which were ever mentioned in the run up to the war. For the Cheney camp it was indeed all about oil. Everything revolves around oil for Dick Cheney. For the real neocons it was all about their Don Quixote vision of a Democratic middle east. For George W. Bush it was all about showing up his "daddy". I suspect that history will show that the Iranians with the help of their man in Washington, Ahmad Chalabi, were a behind the scenes player in all of this and their goal of course was to rid Iraq of their arch enemy Saddam Hussein. They will end up being the only winners here.

Rep. John P. Murtha coming out for an end to US involvement in the war was not the Walter Cronkite moment of the Iraq war but just another indication of the beginning of the end. Iraq is not like Vietnam because Vietnam didn't have another Vietnam before it. The neocons thought that the Vietnam syndrome was behind us but it wasn't. The memories of Vietnam were still present so people were able to recognize a quagmire when they saw one. As milestones passed without improvement, as lights at the end of the tunnel flickered and went out, the American people started thinking they didn't want to go down this road again. With the obvious evidence they were deceived into supporting the war to begin with support for the war and the people who started it began to plummet in the polls.

The administration and supporters of the war are desperate and the facts are not on their side so all they can do is attack those who are critical. Murtha's resolution sent them over the edge. Even the normally rational John Cole was driven to irrationality. The Republican's ploy to force a vote on a phony Murtha resolution will blow up in their faces. Brian Linse does a nice job of summing it up along with some reaction to John Cole's reaction.

My pal, conservo blogger John Cole, seems to be one of the few to have tasted Speaker Hastert's Kool-Aid. While every sentient being, even Bill Schneider on CNN, seems to regard the "Murtha Vote" as a meaningless stunt, Cole seems to think that it truly exposes the hypocrisy of the House Dems.

John doesn't seem concerned that not one Repblican voted for the resolution that they put up, nor that the "Murtha" resolution was re-worded so as to change the meaning of what the decorated war hero was proposing. Rep. Murtha, to no one's surprise, voted "no" on the resolution.

Next time the Speaker passes the Dixie Cup of fluorescent liquid around, John, just say "no".

I believe that this move by the Republicans in the House will quickly be seen as a huge tactical mistake. Rep. Jean Schmidt's bat-shit-crazy speech, which was so appalling that her own fellow Republicans made her request that it be stricken from the record, was just the most obvious error of the session. Nobody in the media is buying it as anything but a stunt, and the Dems are now energized and united in the House the way that Harry "21" Reid's moment spurred the Senate Dems.

Watching this now almost complete Republican melt-down is becoming very entertaining.

And super hawk Andrew Sullivan was highly critical of the move by the House Republicans.

WHY NOT THE MURTHA PROPOSAL? Here's what strikes me as the salient question right now. Why won't the Republicans force a vote on the Murtha proposal - a phased withdrawal over six months - rather than "immediate" withdrawal? If the GOP wants to demonstrate a backbone on the war, let them force that vote. I'd passionately vote it down, if I were a Congressman. But the GOP's proposal is again not a sign of strength. It's a straw-man: as cheap and tawdry as the current GOP leadership. Let me add something more. How pathetic is the credibility of a commander-in-chief that while he is abroad, all hell breaks loose on the war he is allegedly waging? Bush has lost the country on this. It's not the media's fault, not the Democrats', not the military's. It's Bush's, and his sad excuse for a defense secretary.

And Sullivan on bat shit crazy Jean Schmidt.

SHE CALLED MURTHA A COWARD: Republican Congresswoman Jean [Smith] called Jack Murtha a coward this afternoon, unworthy of the Marines, on the House floor. Money quote:

The fiery, emotional debate climaxed when Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, the most junior member of the House, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel. "He asked me to send Congress a message - stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.

She later withdrew her remarks from the record. But those words linger as a reminder of what these Republicans have become. For the record: Murtha served 37 years in the Marines, and has Purple Hearts to his name. He visits wounded soldiers at Walter Reed every week. Three years ago, he won the Semper Fidelis Award of the Marine Corps Foundation, the highest honor the Marines can confer. Every time you think these Republicans can sink no lower, even after their vile smears against Kerry's service last year, they keep going. They make me sick to my stomach.

The war is over. I don't think it will be too long before Andrew Sullivan and others admit it.

Will there be a bloody civil war when the US leaves. Probably, but if you hadn't noticed there is a bloody civil war going on now with US troops caught in the middle. In addition there is a bloody fight going on against the coalition occupiers which will end once the occupiers are gone. And as for al-Qaeda; once the Americans leave so will it's power.

Update
Over at The Left Coaster larre has an excellent post where he brings up a point that I suggested the other day, that Murtha is channeling the Pentagon.

Nearly all press accounts you'll see mention that Murtha is "highly respected" and considered by House colleagues an "expert" on military affairs -- leaving other implications to the reader's imagination. But the Washington Bureau chief for the Philadelphia Inquirer, a newspaper that has covered Murtha closely for years, is more explicit:

"Known as a friend and champion of officers at the Pentagon and in the war zone, it is widely believed in Congress that Murtha often speaks for those in uniform and could be echoing what U.S. commanders in the field and in the Pentagon are saying privately about the conflict."

In other words, Murtha's original resolution -- not the phony version ginned up by House Republicans -- likely describes the actual position of our military leaders, possibly even Donald Rumsfeld, as Tom Oliphant hinted yesterday.

This would make Murtha's statement even more of a "turning point".