Sunday, March 11, 2007

BAD NEWS IS BEST TOLD IN TWO-PARTS: BUSH REALLY WANTS ADDITIONAL 8,200 TROOPS FOR IRAQ & AFGHANISTAN

wArSHINtuHN--It's amazing how these stories change, shift, and the numbers are never fixed. No, I don't mean the president's approval-ratings, I mean these troop-escalations. Yesterday, it was 4,400 (apparently, only slated for Iraq), and today the total is almost doubled for both wars: 8,200. This is a dramatic escalation of forces within the region, which can only mean the Bush administration has wider-aims. Is it Iran? That's a hard-call, as it's becoming obvious that any attacks authorized by the president will have considerable political fallout. Coupled-with a pardon of former Cheney aide, "Scooter" Libby, this could be the final-straw for Congress--even the hawks and the so-called "moderates." Saturday, it's being called a "revised request"...again. And again. And again...

President Bush asked Congress on Saturday for $3.2 billion to pay for 8,200 more U.S. troops needed in Afghanistan and Iraq on top of the 21,500-troop buildup he announced in January. Bush wants Congress to fund 3,500 new U.S. troops to expand training of local police and army units in Afghanistan. The money also would pay for the estimated 3,500 existing U.S. troops he already announced would be staying longer in the region to counter an anticipated Taliban offensive in Afghanistan this spring. (AP, 03.11.2007)

But there is more. AP is saying the original budget request was "$93.4 billion." Bloomberg was saying $93 billion yesterday, and another estimate had it at $96 billion (see article below). Unless you think this is insignificant, consider that Bloomberg left-off $400 million, a tidy-sum to any American, eh? It's a game to to make it appear that less is being requested and spent. The game is shaping all of our perceptions. Luckily, we have the internet.

We should be asking AP and the other wire services exactly what these programs that the Bush administration are. All we get is that they are "low-priority defense items." What would that be? If it's funding for weapons-research...not so bad, but the money shouldn't be appropriated/shifted for any reason other than redeployment. It's official: the president is unbalanced. After Abu-Ghraib, the secret CIA-prisons, the torture, the tens-of-thousands of Iraqi-casualties--the man is insane, he has lost his mind (if he ever had one).

These are costs to allowing these criminals to usurp the Executive branch in 2000. We have been in a constitutional crisis since that time, and Iraq is just one symptom. 9/11 and the rollback of all of our rights is the other, along with a rampant corruption that this nation has ever seen. The cost of cowardice is tyranny, and that's exactly what we've gotten for the last six-years. The time to stand-up and confront these people and their fellow travellers is nigh. The time to confront our representatives wherever they may be is our right to assembly and freedom of movement. I advise everyone with some time on their hands to do so. Be firm, be informed, and stand your ground. Demand direct-answers.

AP: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070311/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq