The Iraq war funding triangulation continues today. In early December, the Wall Street Journal reported that Democratic leaders, in order to avoid being seen either as capitulating to Bush on Iraq or as under-funding the military, "are looking at the option of advancing more money for U.S. military operations in Afghanistan." Meanwhile, "responsible" war critics are being encouraged to wait for General David Petraeus's spring 2008 report, much as they were previously for Petraeus's September 2007 report. It reminds us of New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman's infamous, never-ending six month timeframe for evaluating progress in Iraq.

Talked to kids that have done 2 tours, what a meat grinder, the only ones making money is the contractors. Most of the time they are served slop and eat MRES, while contractors eat steak and have hot showers. why risk your life for somebody that makes 5 times your wages, you are property of the government. If we had leaders that had backbone instead of deep pockets, we could move forward. Simple, surround Baghdad , let no one in no one out, and shoot anything that moves. Both sides will get picture shortly.

Or just bring everybody home--shut it all down...but then how would George and Dick's friends make a living--flippin' burgers? Givin' Speeches like Karl Rove ($30K a pop, and i don't mean a clipmark pop)