Ghost of BiB

Can he? Sure. Will he? Not in our wildest dreams.

No chance. They have Saint Ted. How can anyone overcome that?

Sadly, a couple of my underdog picks got me out of the top 10, and now I'm using them trying to get back. Is that circular logic? We need to borrow NCBills's Ouija board.

I wish I could...I really do...just don't see it. At home? Maybe, but not on the left coast.

Makes sense. I just didn't like the feel some seem to have that he is this lone crusader with impecable credentials and motives. If leaving Iraq tomorrow would leave us with an ally between Syria and Iran, I'd buy the first three rounds.

We're going to be just so smug....

Me too.

Because T-Bone can't post here anymore. HB, once again - Brother Polock.

Just got a feeling. Plus, I'm about in 28th place in the pool. I need some flukes to catch back up. No guts, no glory.

Beer.

Cincy. Colts are due.

I see some parallels to the situation in the Balkans. Ethnic groups artificially pushed together in maplines drawn up by a third party. Some how, that's getting worked out. A part of the problem in effecting a coherent strategy in Iraq is that everyone is not playing off the same page. This is more than a military problem. I strongly suggest reading what you can Google on "Beyond Goldwater-Nichols", published by the NDU. It describes the adjustments that could and should be made to our approach to such situations, by combing and effectively utilizing ALL elements of national power to affect and effect a goal. Something that was successful in the Balkans was the creation of a Joint Interagency Task Force reprting to the NSC. A political-military plan was drawn up specifically for the situation, under PDD-56. To my knowledge, this hasn't been done by this administration. Everyone is playing, but as far as I know, not really in concert. In my "perfect world" this would have been created and functioning well up front, before a Bradley ever crossed the border. I still, personally believe that there is time to do something along these lines so the crap can get straightened out and we can get the hell out of there. What is "victory"? I'll work on another post for that.

Damn. I would have come over. Some eskimo finished my Macallan's off.

Everyone in Baltimore is watching in a bar. I went to a "Sports Bar" one time expecting to see a Bills game somewhere. Out of about 50 TV's, 48 were tuned to the Ravens.

OK, this is obviously a polarized issue. I'm in the camp that thinks until we have conditions favorable to the United States within Iraq, we should stay. A lot of folks mention "adequate troop levels". Once again, I just don't understand how puliing out brigade by brigade is going to make that situation any better for those still on the ground...but whatever. Maybe someone can explain it to me. What about the idea of maybe trying to do certain things differently, and visibly? What about putting MORE people into Iraq, rather than using less? We're stretched thin, but it could be done. What about a targeted information-PR campaign within the country to help the guy on the street understand that some mistakes were made, but we are working hard to make things better for all. Don't put all of this on the administration. Our military forces can't be re-trained or re-structured overnight tailored to whatever war they may have to fight. They have certain means of getting certain things done, and they use them - as they should. I don't think many people gave the ramifications of house to house bang down doors midnight searches much thought until just about everyone was pissed off. I don't even want to get too deep into the WMD search...more than one field commander knew he had sensitive sites along his advance, and was supposed to at least search if not secure them - but blew it off in the dash for Baghdad. There's literally dozens that we'll never know what was contained or worked on there, because everything had been looted before they were exploited. I'm not "blindly following the administration" on this, the core idea of getting rid of Sadaam and effecting regime change is a good one, in terms of our interests. You need do little more than look at a map. All of this, right or wrong could have been avoided if Hussein played nice and did what he was supposed to do after Gulf 1. He didn't.

The "War on Terrorism" or "War on Terror" is a seperate though related entity, and IS being prosecuted with many successes. It is simply a very different kind of war, fought through very different means. For one thing, it doesn't require a lot of troops, relatively speaking. It is intell heavy, and requires expertise in areas such as international banking and criminal investigation. We have many, many allies in the GWOT - several who for whatever reason were opposed to invading Iraq. France, Russia and Germany come forefront to the mind. Point is, the things going on in Iraq aren't diminishing the global efforts towards combating terrorism.

He didn't put together a Bill in a vacuum and just show up one day saying "look what I got". I personally think this was worked out by a cabal inside the capitol, and because of his stature, and background, he was chosen to carry the flag. If Ted or Hillary had offered up a troop withdrawl bid, I don't believe many would have given it much attention. Someone is going for the drama angle.

I hope you spit the heads out, and don't swallow. But to each his own.

Single Malt Scotch (Oban), but once again...this is unrelated to Bills Football and should be immediately removed to the proper venue. You are not allowed to discuss booze here, you must discuss only Buffalo Bills related issues that have long since been beaten into the dirt. It's a rule.

Where's my friggen pictures, lightweight?

Leather and rubber tonight? What's wrong with your webcam?

He's automatically your hero, because he's been on TV. How many people have heard of him before last week? I thought so.

Go watch someone fake shiddt. That makes you a man. Ask your ticket buddy.

Technically it's a plan...it just describes different courses of action based on expected or anticipated scenarios - exactly as it should. It does NOT say "x guys will leave y date, no matter what".

A "plan" of sorts was given to Rumsfeld, but it's based on a lot of "what if" scenarios. "If "A" happens we could do this, if "B" happens we can do that" etc. It doesn't specify anything real specific.