Maliki is cozying up to Sadr because he doesn’t trust the Americans to stay till the IDF is ready. Sadr is backing off because he knows the Americans won’t stay.

georgej, the public voted its boredom in 2006. War is unfashionable. This war is doubly unfashionable: no obvious metric for victory and not enough blood and guts for the train-wreck effect.

God help us all if a Democrat takes the White House in ‘08.

First you have to find authorization in the Constitution where CONGRESS can declare “peace,” like they can declare war. There isn’t any such Congressional power. Which means that the only thing Congress can do is shut off financing — which is a power the Constitution gives Congress.

Second, the War Powers Act doesn’t apply, either. The War Powers act requires that absent an authorization for war, the President can act, though he has a time limit in order to report to Congress and for them to approve. But CONGRESS already authorized war in Public Law 107-243.

Third, Congress can pass any law they want, but the President does NOT have to obey any law in violation of the Constitution. Marbury v. Madison clearly states that the President must consider the Constitutionality of a law before enforcing it, and that the sole arbiter of Constitutionality resides in the Courts. As I noted above, Congress does not have the power to “declare peace,” and Marbury states that an unconstitutional law is NULL AND VOID and must not be enforced or obeyed by ANY branch or unit of the government.

Fourth, regardless of the Constitutionality of a public law to force the President to end the war, either by cutting off the funds or the unconstitutional “reauthorizing” the war, the President can VETO it. And it takes a 2/3rds vote in both Houses to override. In neither the House or the Senate do the Democrats have a veto proof majority.

What the Democrats are going to do is set themselves up for a bad beating in 2008. Why? The PUBLIC DID NOT VOTE FOR DEFEAT in 2006. Democrats and liberals delude themselves if they have a mandate to bring about the defeat of the United States. THIS TIME, the Internet, the blogosphere, the New Media will insure that any attempt by the Democrats to bring about defeat will cost them dearly in the polls on election day.

Death squad leaders have fled Baghdad to evade capture or killing by American and Iraqi forces before the start of the troop “surge” and security crackdown in the capital.
A former senior Iraqi minister said most of the leaders loyal to Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical anti-American cleric, had gone into hiding in Iran.

So, Here we go, THE EVIDENCE.

Not only is the plan a good plan, but it is SUCH an improvement that the death squads are on the run BEFORE WE EVEN DEPLOY THE PLAN.

Just the Idea of having US troops garrison captured areas under the new plan has them on the run.

wow.

So, Every person that votes this plan down shows that they are a fool. An utter and complete fool.

There is nothing else to say. I’ve been saying this since 2003. It’s in countless documents from the Certer from Peacekeeping studies at the US Army War College.

I’m still pissed that it took this long for us to get a commander that has a basic understanding of large scale military engagement, but now that we have one, and the plan I’ve wanted for years….

BAH.

We’ll see just what the congress has to say and just who’s an elected official not fit to sweep the sidewalks outside the Capitol Building.

Oh yes, we’ll see.

The question is, will they? I don’t think they would. Even Robert Byrd, by posturing, knows that leaving would result in a Very Bad Thing.

Death squad chieftains flee to beat Baghdad surge Hala Jaber, Amman and Sarah Baxter, Washington DEATH SQUAD leaders have fled Baghdad to evade capture or killing by American and Iraqi forces before the start of the troop “surge” and security…

They’d probably decline to consider the question, figuring that voters would punish the president and his party in the next election if he continued to wage war against Congress’s will.

I think they may punish the Congress for even allowing a situation like this to come up. After all, a strong argument is that the vote to repeal authorization directly undermines the troops who are in a war zone. I think that with the New Media to sound this clarion call, the Dem’s in Congress would be toast. Good bye majority. Good bye Presidency. Good by Democrat Party.

As imagined by defense consultant Gary Anderson.

A bit of clarification please. I see this as being an opinion piece by Gary Anderson and the only part written by Gary is:

How Sadr May See the Surge
If Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army had a planning directorate …
By Gary Anderson

I don’t think Gary is a defense consultant. The rest of the piece is written by a defense consultant as an opposition player during war games exercises, one of our team.

But, that’s politics for ya.

I’ve got a feeling that’s what’s going to happen whether his guys are strong enough or not.

Big A,

I have a nice shiny quarter to bet against ye on this one. ’sides, I am on the “go” list come October 1, 2008…could always end up in Afghanistan again, I suppose.

Who are we going to undeclair war on ? The Iraqi inurgency is not the iraqi people. There is more than enough clear evidence that its foreign backed and based.

Do the democrats want to say that we wont declair war on Iran even as Iran is building Nuclear weapons ?

This is stupid on so many levels. The democrats have no legal leg to stand on. Unless they are arguing that they want to restore the Saddam regime.

.