Soldier's For The Truth is providing a disturbingly vivid picture of how our troops are being "supported". Poor training, equipment, and a rush to move National Guard and Reserve forces into the theater of operation are resulting in inadequacies that no amount of yellow ribbons are going to reverse.

Weather it be people (our most valuable commodity) or oil, Bush just doesn’t understand the concept of a finite resource.

So I guess we are down to about 170 tons of missing MDX now. Give or take 100 tons. I guess there is some progress in Iraq after all.

Paging Toby Petzold. Your country needs you

I think I'll grab a sweater. I feel a draft in the air............

Yeah, the red states will care about this War when their sons and daughters start receiving their draft notices in mass.

the red states will care about this War when their sons and daughters start receiving their draft notices in mass.

If nothing else, election 2004 should teach us that there is nothing that the Bush PR machine (with full and willing support of corporate media) can't accomplish. When, not if, the draft arrives the spin will somehow cause the red states to blame the liberals for it. Such as: "We wouldn't be having to draft soldiers now if it weren't for the liberal media undermining Bush in Iraq." That sort of thing.

The rank-and-file Republican may watch Republicans control government for 20 years; lose all his children to war; have his job outsourced; see his pension and medical coverage vanish; and have his home condemned for peanuts in an eminent domain action in favor of a new Walmart; and he will still blame the Liberals because Rush and the NRA tell him to do so.

I disagree with Observers comments with regards to red state voters blaming liberals for a return of the military draft. Yes, some of them will blame liberals or Bill Clinton or someone who is a Democrat for resumption of the draft, but when one is rafting up the River Denial, there are rapids and rocks that can tip the Denial rafter overboard. Those rapids and rocks are called reality. When a red state voter's son is called up for service in Iraq, you will see a number of them electroshocked out of their post 9/11 neoconservative fantasy world. The red staters that don't have any sons or sons of draft age will continue to raft up the River Denial because they have nothing to lose. But I am enough of a realist to know that some people are as stupid as Observer points out, so those folks will still support the Commander-in-Thief.

However, I did read on Daily Kos a Diary from one Kerry voter who talked with a young woman Bush voter. She was in her early twenties and married. She voted for Bush and did not worry about a future military draft because she thought that her 24 year old husband was too old to be drafted. Seems she was mistaken when it came to the age range for possible draftees (she thought it was 18-23 years of age). When she was informed that the draft age goes up to 26, this Bush voter's face went white as sheet.

The Ruthuglikkkan noise machene will only be effective as long as the red voter in question
isn't having to personally suffer.

OFF SUBJECT, KINDA: What would Christ do?

The Palestine Chronicle

After spending over three years lecturing the world about ‘our values’, George Bush was asked a very simple question during a press conference at the G8 Summit in Sea Island, Georgia.

Question: This is a moral question: Is torture ever justified?

THE PRESIDENT: Look, I'm going to say it one more time. If I -- maybe -- maybe I can be more clear. The instructions went out to our people to adhere to law. That ought to comfort you. We're a nation of law. We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at those laws, and that might provide comfort for you. And those were the instructions out of -- from me to the government.

Is that clear enough for you? We have laws on the books to ‘comfort us’? Damn, I’ve had it so wrong for so long. I always thought we had laws on the books that reflected our ‘values’ and that the government enforced them to make sure we all got along and respected each other’s rights. Now, I know better. We have law books for comfort. If it’s a cold and stormy winter night, we can burn them to generate heat.

A little later on in the conference, in response to other questions about his relationship with the other leaders who attended the G8 summit, George was back preaching about values. “We’re united by values. We're united by common values. …I like courageous leaders, people who express their opinions. …It’s hard to have a good meeting with somebody if you always wonder what their opinion is.”

Right about now, I am still wondering about Bush’s opinion of torture. Does his opinion reflect the values enunciated in the Convention Against Torture, ratified by the United States in 1994? Does he agree with the sentence in that treaty that states that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture."

How about some follow up questions from these slick mass media reporters favored enough to get an invitation to ask George some ‘torture’ question. If torture were made legal under American and international law, would an avowed God fearing Christian consider it moral? After all, abortion is legal but George considers it immoral. So, one has to assume that even Dumbya can make the distinction between morality and legality. How would Jesus treat Abu Ghraib inmates or Afghan ‘illegal combatants’? Are American values consistent with torturing inmates to death? Did George Abu Ghraib Bush abandon his values when he approved twenty-eight ‘kinder gentler’ forms of torture?

Is it true that the Bush administration has handed over individuals to certain foreign jurisdictions where torture is routinely practiced? Is that not a breach of the Convention Against Torture, which just happens to be the law of the land? Before George gets more comfortable by burning another law book, could he tell us what Jesus would do?

Or how about the holier than though John Ashcroft, a man whose modesty compels him to cover up naked marble breasts because they affront his religious sensibilities. Forget about tortured legal opinions, what does holy Johnny really think about stripping Iraqi men naked in front of lewd sadistic women and setting wild dogs on them? Why doesn’t he demonstrate his moral fiber by releasing those memos approving torture? Maybe Ashcroft could paste them on those naked marble mammeries that so offend him? Or is he concerned that the memos are too obscene for people with ‘our values’? What would Jesus do with those memos Johnny? Would he claim executive privilege for Caesar?

How about Boykin, the man with the bigger god. Maybe he could give us another sermon on whether Jesus would set dogs on the ‘enemies of his bigger god’. Isn’t this a good time for Boykin to conduct a revival meeting with all kind of moving passages from the scriptures about how to properly torture the evil ones? What exact instructions did Jesus leave for the proper conduct of Christian soldiers in torture chambers? If God knows of a sparrow falling from the sky, would he not notice that Boykin was a party to the systematic humiliation and torture of defenseless naked Iraqi prisoners? Praise the Lord and go fetch the wild dogs.

Moving on to Rummy. How much of the ‘known knowns’ is he desperately trying to bury in the ‘unknown’ file? Is torture considered torture only when it causes ‘organ failure, impairment of bodily function or death?’ Can he explain the memos condoning such practices? What exactly is his definition of ‘one-dimensional’ torture? Instead of banning cameras in America’s Iraqi gulags, shouldn’t he be making them standard issue so that we can all get a two dimensional perspective of what goes on in Abu Ghraib and Fallujah? After the scandal broke, was it a good idea for Rummy to visit Abu Ghraib in an Israeli-made armored bus?

And while they’re explaining their role in the Abu Ghraib torture chambers, maybe these avowed Christians can do us another favor by giving us a body count of all the innocent Iraqis who were maimed, disfigured and killed by indiscriminate American firepower? What would Jesus say about ‘collateral damage’? Would he walk among the corpses and give the public an accurate tally? Would he casually walk away from the wounded and leave them to bleed to death? Would he investigate each incident to make sure that we don’t have rogue elements shooting up innocent Iraqi bystanders? Do the secret terms of engagement for jittery young American soldiers conform to biblical injunctions against the taking of innocent life?

When exactly did Christian doctrine devolve from ‘love your enemy’ to ‘sodomize your enemy’?
In virtually every speech and interview, no matter the subject matter, Bush performs a little dog and pony show to preach his values and his faith and his religion. So, why can’t he give us a straight answer about whether torture is an acceptable part of his ‘faith tradition’? You are either for torture or against it? We don’t want the comfort of your law books, George. We want to know your heart. Once again, the question is: “Dumbya, regardless of what the law says, do you think torture is moral?”

Isn’t it way past time for the president to demonstrate his commitment to the values that he incessantly preaches? Wouldn’t it inspire the children of America if George and the rest of our high priests performed a soul cleansing ‘mea culpa’ concerto and then retired to a nunnery? Impeach yourself George and sin no more.

9 soldiers dead. That is just horrible. I remember Vietnam. After awhile no one was shocked at the daily amount of soldiers being killed. They got so complacent that it wasn't on the news half the time. What is it going to take for the American military families to start protesting this senseless War?

Well, the nine all went - voluntarily - to fight in an unjustified war, so my sympathy is low. How many Iraqis died the same day, and why are they not being counted?

My sympathies are with the soldiers and the Iraqis. I don't believe that all of the soldiers and marines in Iraq believe it is a just War. Many are being sent over as part of a back door draft. 40% are reserves and national guard. Surely, they didn't intend to become full time warriors. In answer to your questions about dead Iraq's, I believe the Bush Administration is fully aware, and doesn't want Americans to know.

Judith,

Thanks for that. I think the lynch mobs of the south were "God fearing Christians" too.

"Well, the nine all went - voluntarily" Uh, NO, messenger. Active Duty GI's are ordered to do whatever they do, including go to sleep, under penalty of imprisonment. You need to set your sights a bit higher, say, Commander in Chief.

I agree with T2. People who signed up trusted their leadership. How naive is that? They were betrayed in more ways than one. I hope the troops that are lucky enough to come home, can survive the mental damage Rummy, Bush and War have foisted on them.

result in part-timers being called to active duty multiple times for up to two years each time,

Very, very poor planning. These poor people are going to have some pretty severe problems when they come home. Thank God the idiot son of George Bush doesn't properly fund veteran's services. Otherwise, we might have to deal with it later.

A large portion of our volenteer military comes from rural areas, poorer inner city areas and legal aliens hoping for citizenship. Yes, these unfortunates knew they were taking a risk when they joined the military in hopes of building a better life, but what person in their right mind could have envisioned the Bush would be this bad?

The really sad part is that the "right" mind people STILL don't realize he's that bad. I was reading letters to senator Boxer on www.congress.org and there are so many idiots writing nasty letters. "get over it" - I never will, a nation of morons