"What's human sacrifice if not sending guys off to Iraq for no reason?"
FROM Gen. John P. Abizaid, senior commander in the Middle East for more than 3 years (until replaced by the President in early 2007) and the most senior U.S. military officer of direct Arab descent, as reported by the New York Times on December 20, 2006:
"... he argues that foreign troops are a toxin bound to be rejected by Iraqis, and that expanding the number of American troops merely puts off the day when Iraqis are forced to take responsibility for their own security... General Abizaid argues for a broader approach to Iraq than that of looking solely to putting out the fires in Baghdad.
'You have to internationalize the problem,' General Abizaid said. 'You have to attack it diplomatically, geo-strategically. You just can't apply a microscope on a particular problem in downtown Baghdad and a particular problem in downtown Kabul and say that somehow or another, if you throw enough military forces at it, that you are going to solve the broader issues in the region of extremism.' "
FROM Jonathan Singer at MyDD blog, January 6, 2007:
"The fact that anyone -- particularly military leaders -- would believe that George W. Bush is taking any steps that could lead towards the redeployment of American forces is simply amazing. President Bush has staked his administration on the Iraq War, using American troops to prove, as a metaphor, his resolve in the so-called 'War on Terror.' As such, he cannot and will not, during his tenure in office, remove troops from Iraq...
It is neither a strategic nor political move but rather one of stubbornness and unwillingness to accept reality. The American people understand that; this is, in part, why they so overwhelmingly oppose the proposed escalation.
And the sooner that those in the governing circles in Washington understand that, instead of continuing to play the President's games, the better."
"If in your presence an individual tried to sacrifice an American serviceman or woman, would you intervene?
Would you at least protest?
What if he had already sacrificed 3,003 of them?
What if he had already sacrificed 3,003 of them and was then to announce his intention to sacrifice hundreds, maybe thousands, more?
... Sacrifice? No. A drop in the bucket.
The additional men and women you have sentenced to go there, sir, will serve only as targets.
They will not be there 'short-term,' Mr. Bush; for many it will mean a year or more in deaths shadow.
This is not temporary, Mr. Bush.
For the Americans who will die because of you... it will be as permanent as it gets.
...Mr. Bush, your judgment about Iraq and now about 'sacrifice' is at variance with your peoples, to the point of delusion.
Your most respected generals see no value in a 'surge' they could not possibly see it in this madness of 'sacrifice.'
The Iraq Study Group told you it would be a mistake.
... Your citizens, the people for whom you work, have told you they do not want this, and more over, they do not want you to do this.
Yet once again, sir, you have ignored all of us.
Mr. Bush, you do not own this country!"
At the end of Keith Olbermann's indignant commentary, Rosie wrote, "BRAVO MR O!!"
Just imagine... American consensus is so united against another U.S. troop surge in Iraq War that bitterly feuding enemies, Donald Trump and Rosie O'Donnell, are in agreement!