Lead editorial from this morning's Washington Journal

[CatWoman]

From the Christian Science Monitor, no less.

The author even called in and spoke briefly about her article.

This is a very, very good read. And you guys should listen to the blistering critiques of the Bush* administration from public callers. The question was "Should the UN take over for the US in Iraq". Today's program has been archived, and can be found on the C-Span front page (www.cspan.org).

Better UN than US administering Iraq

By Helena Cobban

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA. – The US intervention in Iraq, which was earlier sold to the US public as a potential "cakewalk," has instead turned into a damaging quagmire. The least- bad choice now for President Bush is to hand the administration of Iraq over to the United Nations.

As I had earlier predicted, the US engagement in Iraq has turned into a Vietnam-style imbroglio. The question now is: What can the Bush administration do so that it won't dig itself even deeper into desert quicksands?

Continuing the present policy of trying to administer Iraq nearly unilaterally offers zero foreseeable chance of success for two reasons:

First, the casualty toll continues to mount. Twenty-nine US troops have been killed in combat since Mr. Bush declared hostilities over on May 1 - and an additional 42 have been killed in "noncombat incidents" in Iraq. (Many of these incidents were related to the climate of insecurity.)

Second, there is the cost of the massive and ever-lengthening US troop presence in Iraq. The Brookings Institution's military specialist Michael O'Hanlon has written that even if Washington can secure 20,000 to 30,000 troops from other allies (in addition to those already sent by Britain), "125,000 to 150,000 US troops could still be needed for a year or more - with 50,000 to 75,000 Americans remaining in and around Iraq come 2005 and 2006."

more: http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0710/p09s01-coop.html

[mjb4]

1. Take Over Biatch!

this is how Bush treated the UN over those day of lying to the world and instigating paybacks for those that did not comply. It is a shame, but typical of the arrogance of a shrub.

[opihimoimoi]

2. When playing POKER, a good player knows when to fold

These adventures in Afghanistan/Iraq/Africa to promote the notion of a de facto new world order run by the PUBS desguised as peaceful interventions is hurting America. Not only financially but in credibility too. In addition, the hate level went up; Americans can no longer go abroad feeling safe as before due to Bushies Bluinders.

Auwe auwe, Pilikea O ka Aina

[papau]

3. Interesting how NYT reports latest 2 dead make 83 since victory lap, 73 GI

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/10/international/worldspecial/10CND-IRAQ.html?hp

Two U.S. Soldiers Killed as Iraqi Resistance Persists By ROBERT F. WORTH with KIRK SEMPLE BAGHDAD, July 10 — In another wave of adversity for American troops in Iraq, two more soldiers were killed by insurgents and an Iraqi police contingent demanded that the Americans who trained them leave the police station.The casualties occurred late Wednesday in two separate ambushes. In one incident, a soldier was fatally shot when his convoy came under attack from small-arms fire near the city of Al Mahmudiya, the United States Central Command said today.

In a separate attack, another soldier was killed and one wounded by a rocket-propelled grenade at an undisclosed location, the military said.The military also reported that a soldier died on Wednesday from "a non-hostile gunshot incident." The names of the dead and wounded were withheld pending notification of the families, a Central Command spokesman in Baghdad said early today. No further details on the three incidents were available, he added.

At least 37 members of coalition forces, 31 of them American, have been killed in combat since May 1 when President Bush declared the end of major combat operations, the military said. An additional 46 coalition members have been killed in non-hostile incidents, the military said. <snip>

[PROGRESSIVE1]

4. Pragmatically Speaking...

The U.N should take over because this is their job. However, America started this and America must finish it!

[revcarol]

5. Have they been listening to Kucinich?

U.S. needs to ask the U. N. to establish a peace-keeping force."The United States needs to get out of there as a singular force."
U. S. not leave until the U. N. force in place in adequate numbers.

The U. S. has an obligation to help rebuild Iraq."We broke that country. And now we have the obligation to make the country whole."

Out of the mouths of supposedly unelectable candidates.