Losing the PR War, Cont.

The disappointing but not surprising international backlash over the execution of Saddam Hussein continues and expands. In the former case, US lack of sway in Baghdad and the ham-handed handling of the trial and execution impinges on one of our more promising international partnerships and portends continued difficulties in the developing world:

There is even criticism, from both the right and the left, of the Indian government's muted response to the execution, New Delhi's stance dictated by the increasingly close relations with the U.S., exemplified by the controversial nuclear co-operation agreement.If India is a key barometer of the non-Western world, and it often is, Saddam's hanging will come to haunt George W. Bush.

In the latter, "a few drugged-up good timers" may be the only ones out protesting, but our good pals in "Old" Europe are making hay by turning the debacle into a referendum on the "barbarous" American practice of using the death penalty.

Rome lit up the arches of its ancient Colosseum at dusk on Saturday to protest against the death penalty after Saddam Hussein's hanging, with the mayor calling it the city's symbol to the world for human rights..."The Colosseum originally was a place of persecution and unspeakable violence," Mayor Walter Veltroni said. "But now it is a symbol of peace and reconciliation." The hanging of the former Iraqi dictator has touched a nerve in Italy, setting off a wave of appeals against the death penalty and prompting a hunger strike from Radical Party leader Marco Pannella, who thanked the mayor from his hospital bed for lighting up the Colosseum.

These developments say a great deal about the status of the American project in Iraq. Our political position is so weakend by this albatross that there is no choice but to leave. And day by day, the international bullseye on the US grows larger as a result of not acknowledging this fact. Bush's stubborness in facing the music assures us of being the punchline to ill-premised witticisms emanating from the morally bankrupt and largely ignorant peanut gallery. I never said we should leave because we are losing the battle on the ground or that our troops don't have good morale, strong capabilities or inflict more damage on the enemy than is inflicted upon them. What I said is that there is no longer the political will to win this war. These are two very different issues.

Congress, the media, our European and Middle Eastern allies, the Maliki government, our enemies and many others are hostile to our presence in Iraq and the president's policies because it is in their crass self-interest to be so. Global public opinion is largely swayed by these interests and in many cases doesn't know any better. In the face of this reality, the war is lost. As in Vietnam, we ceded not one acre of territory to the enemy in battle. But the PR war and the political battle have left this administration thoroughly trounced. It's over, and Bush and a few stragglers are the only ones who don't recognize it.

The longer this nation refuses to acknowledge this reality, the deeper the hole we dig in terms of our credibility and our ability to influence events elsewhere. As I suggested in my original post on this subject, our inability to shape events with regard to this project suggests that there is nothing to win, and consequently, no reason to stay. I still believe Iraq was a just war and that the policy of ousting Saddam and planting the seeds of democracy in that country was a noble endeavor. I do believe we had it within our grasp to succeed. But the bumbling of this administration in the aftermath of the invasion gave rise to the coalition of forces which ultimately have cleaned our clocks on the political front. Staying gains us nothing. Leaving at least has the advantage of removing our folks from harm's way and gives us the chance to change the subject. And changing the subject is critical to striking a reasonable balance between hard power (military) and soft power (economics, culture, international institutions and public diplomacy). That means winning the War on Terror, repairing damaged relationships and reclaiming our status as Madeleine Albright's "indispensible nation."

While urging withdrawal may seem weak and spineless to some, it is quite the opposite. It is bold in terms of facing up to a hard reality. It stings and it is in some respects, unfair. But it is; unfortunately, the truth.

Andy Rooney Moment

And what's the deal with the BCS National Championship game between Ohio State and Florida being a full week after New Year's Day???

I'm sorry, but this BCS thing is a farce and every year they put in a new wrinkle, a new spin. And it always seems to take a turn for the worse.

Now, about stadium naming rights...

LTMVP = SDSB

The best player in professional football finally received his due this week. San Diego's LaDainian Tomlinson (seen above applying a brutal stiff arm against the Redskins last year that resulted in the 'Skins player on his back and springing LT for a long TD run) won the NFL MVP and NFL Offensive Player of the Year awards by acclamation. In polling for both awards he easily outpaced the #2 in the voting, former Chargers' QB Drew Brees.

And that is as it should be.

Tomlinson's record breaking year has by now been well-chronicled, but let me point out three key stats that bring it home:

* Tomlinson tallied 186 points this season, eclipsing Paul Hornung's record. The Raiders as a team scored 168.

* In one ten week stretch, Tomlinson scored 28 touchdowns. That accounts for exactly 168 points. So to be clear, one player accomplished in ten games what it took an entire (albeit woeful) team to accomplish in sixteen.

* Tomlinson's record 31 rushing TD's were more than the number thrown by any quarterback in the league this season.

Amazing.

I watched Tomlinson play a lot at TCU and always knew he'd be good a good pro. But I never knew he'd be this good. Back then, he'd just hit the line and take off on a straight-line 70 yard touchdown. And he'd do that over and over. It's been different in the pros, but Tomlinson has even improved as he's aged. He picks his holes, shows patience, has become an excellent receiver out of the backfield, is a good blocker and is 5-6 in passing in his career....with 5 touchdown passes.

Special.

But not as special as the man. In this era of look-at-me athletes, LT is a humble megastar. No celebration dances. No antics. A true team player. Check out his comments upon winning the awards this week:

Tomlinson credits the close-knit nature of the Chargers for his outstanding year.

"Every day you go to work with these guys," he said. "They're a special group to me. I think this group I will always remember more than any other football team I've been on. We've got a unique situation that kind of reminds me of college days. That's something that you really don't get in the National Football League, because you really don't have the time to get to know guys and really spend time with them. "On this team it's different. It seems like every guy is like a brother." It's that brotherhood, that camaraderie and the respect for each other that LT cherishes more than any records. "It's more important to me to be a better person. At the end of the day that's what people remember," Tomlinson said. "Football is a game that I obviously love to play and a lot of guys enjoy playing the game. But that's not who I am. I'm not just a football player. I'm a human being, an individual, a person. I respect other human beings and that's what it's all about, giving respect to other human beings and just really trying to have an impact on people's lives that I come across because I am in a position to do that."

The work on the field speaks for itself and so does the breath of fresh air. Give former Chargers' GM John Butler a lot of credit. Before his passing due to lung cancer, he foresaw the greatness of LT and shrewdly maneuvered to draft him by passing on Michael Vick. At the time, Butler was ridiculed. But as this season has proven, Butler made the right call. While Vick was making obscene gestures, continuing his struggle with the quarterback position and ending the Atlanta career of yet another coach, LT was leading the Chargers to a 14-2 record and the top of the league. He did it all with dignity, class and the sense of place and purpose that is the hallmark of not only a great player, but a great person. LaDainian Tomlinson's drive and understanding that it is the guys around him who are just as responsible for his success as his physical talent, is a breed apart. And it is this unique combination which has the Chargers poised for post-season success.

I'll be in San Diego next weekend for the Chargers' opening playoff game. I'll be blogging *LIVE* from the site of the march to the Super Bowl. Stay tuned.

Defining Cynical

Bill Quick:

Bush was planning on skedaddling from Iraq before 2008 anyway, since it has long been obvious that Iraq cannot be pacified without taking on Iran and Syrian, and Bush, for whatever reason, has no intention of doing so.

Now come the Democrats bearing gifts on silver platters. I expect that Bush is pushing a surge because he knows it will inflame and harden Democratic opposition, and as a result the Democrats will force Bush (kicking and screaming, oh my) into withdrawing from Iraq. Bush will end up with what he wants - Iraq no longer hung around the Republican Party’s neck like a rotting albatross going into 2008 - but the disaster in Iraq that will follow withdrawal will instead be hung around the Democratic party’s neck.

Like a noose.

Which will all be well and good, except for the disastrous medium and long term consequences for the United States itself.

That's just beyond dark. Though he at least takes a stab at what keeps the President from dealing bluntly with Syria and Iran.

Paleocon of the week

Every week...Pat Buchanan verbally vomits all over the evil, rotten-to-the-core neocons. I still don't get it though.

It's as if media has forgotten how loathed a fellow Buchanan was 15-years ago. Given enough time, apparently, anybody can rehab their rep.

Leaving no Doubt

Jules Crittenden on war with Iran. A provocative thought for sure, but Iran's obvious complicity in the goings-on in Iraq is something too-long ignored at our own peril.

Feeling Queasy

Questions and Answers

Well, really just a lot of questions. Victor Davis Hanson keeps 'em coming at the Corner today:

Why, when we are bombarded with cries that our freedoms are being eroded by the Patriot Act or wiretaps, do few civil libertarians complain of two egregious examples of government overreach: the scandalous abuse of prosecutorial power by the Duke "rape" case District Attorney, or the Inspector Javert-like Special Prosecutor who still pursues Scooter Libby, when we know the identity of the real leaker, and Joe Wilson (of "frog marched" fame) is reluctant to testify in a case that grew out of his own lamentations?

Heh. The answer isn't that difficult to find. Call it whatever you like, but Bush is the problem. The only problem. At least in that warped little world...


Why, when we are giving billions of dollars in aid to autocratic Egypt, does that government allow Al-Qaeda affiliates to broadcast anti-American propaganda on its state-run satellite? This is apparently not the normal Muslim extremism, but overt jihadist cries to kill Americans. Surely can't the US at least smile—and put a hold of a few months on the next hand-out check, Abrams tank, or bushel of wheat?

Primarily because we do nothing about it. Besides writing next month's check that is...

Unlike many Western anti-war movements—the American anger over the Mexican War or the Philippines counter-insurgency, or the French furor over Algeria—the present anti-war movement (if it is that) is incoherent.

The latest evidence was Donald Trump's creepy claim that "When you're a president who has destroyed the lives of probably a million people, our soldiers and Iraqis who are maimed and killed - you see children going into school in Baghdad with no arms and legs..." His outburst comes in the climate of Saddam Hussein's end, who really did kill a million.

Disappointing. I've always thought the Donald was halfway intelligent. Not sure why he'd throw his lot in with the rest of the Hollywierd foreign-policy experts...

No need to comment on the "no arms and legs" in the context of the United States restoring schools and trying to provide Iraqis reformed education. We have gone from Hezbollah and Dr. Zawahiri referencing Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky to excurses on impeachment from deep thinkers like Bill Maher and Keith Olbermann to Halliburton plots to "no blood for oil" to "the world's greatest terrorist" to novels and movies dreaming of assassinating the President to George Soros's Nazi allusions and now to the ultimate trivialization of the anti-war crowd-that the war is a monumental uncool drag, a has-been distraction from more important things like fighting with Rosie or bucking up a naughty beauty queen or staged "you're fired" poses. Meanwhile somewhere out there tonight there are courageous Marines and Army soldiers who are fighting for a cause they deeply believe in and are assured they can win. They are not cutting off or blowing up anyone's "arms and legs", but have already ensured that Saddam Hussein will never again do such things and are trying to assure that his terrorist successors can't either much longer.

But he didn't have WMD's...

Days of Wine & Roses

Happy Days are here again, right?! After 12 years in the political wilderness, Democrats returned to Congress and assumed their positions of leadership in the House and Senate today.

No doubt that all the world's wrongs will be righted with the new planned minimum-wage hike, universal health-care and other overdue Gubmint programs that may be coming our way. But somehow, I couldn't help but think that today's rainy weather was an incredibly apt bit of providential foreshadowing.

Speaking of brutality

Yesterday, Mario Loyola wondered whether we have the determination necessary to fight a brutal enemy in the ME at anything like their own capacity for brutal behavior. Then last night, Dean Barnett noted this from Strategy Page, also from yesterday:

December 28, 2006: Without much fanfare, much less a press release, the government and Coalition troops have gone to war with Moqtada al Sadrs Mahhi Army militia. Leaders are being arrested or killed. The raids are being carried out with overwhelming speed and force, so that pro-Sadr gunmen have little chance to put up effective resistance. Some of the raids are in support of an effort to find five civilian security contractors (four Americans and an Austrian), who are held by a Shia militia for ransom, or political purposes. No one is sure, and that apparently includes the kidnappers. The five men were seized six weeks ago.

Some American commanders are urging that several additional brigades of U.S. combat troops be brought in for a few months, to back the Iraqi security forces, as the Shia militias are taken down. The most dangerous part of this plan is now, with the well armed and motivated militias still intact. But once the organizations are broken, and arms, records and leaders seized, the problem will be largely a police, not military one.

"Moqtada, Moqtada!, Moqtada!," indeed.

This needed to happen two years ago and the worst thing that could happen now is a premature end to such operations. So again we come back to the central question: Do we have the determination to finish this?

Singularly Unimpressed

Duke University yesterday invited back two of the Lacrosse players accused of rape last spring:

Duke University and its lacrosse team have offered to reinstate two players accused in an alleged sexual assault of a stripper at an off-campus team party -- but at least one of them, Collin Finnerty of Garden City, wants to first legally establish his innocence before re-enrolling, his father said.Soon after Duke President Richard Brodhead invited the accused players back Tuesday, lacrosse coach John Danowski talked with Finnerty and told him he was welcome to rejoin the nationally ranked team, his father, Kevin Finnerty, said.

"Collin's reaction was very mature," Kevin Finnerty said. "He said, 'Dad, I'd love to be there, playing with my friends for Coach Danowski. But I don't think I should be going back until this is successfully resolved.'"He's not going to go back until we get a successful resolution of these charges, and that means an innocent verdict or dropping of the other charges," Kevin Finnerty said.

The reinstatement offer came after Durham County, N.C. District Attorney Michael Nifong last month dropped rape charges against the Duke players, saying the accuser had changed her story.

Nifong left standing kidnapping and sex offense charges that could bring more than 30 years in prison for Finnerty, Reade Seligmann, of Essex Fells, N.J., and a third Duke player, David Evans, of Bethesda, Md., who graduated in May.

In a statement, Brodhead said, "We have decided that the right and fair thing to do is to welcome back Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty. ... The circumstances in this case have changed substantially."

In otherwords, "Please don't sue the pants off us!"

It passed

Unanimously. Avenue Flower Shop will be moving out and Good Samaritan will be moving in!

Comings and Goings

John Negroponte is stepping aside as National Intelligence Director to take the number two job at State. I'm not sure what this says about the NID position, how it will be filled and what that might mean for Iraq and our long-term objectives in restructuring our intelligence capabilities, but I'm pleased that Negroponte is staying on at State. Along with the man he will be replacing, Robert Zoellick, Negroponte has been one of the more underrated members of the Bush foreign policy team. Both are real stars. It was a shame to see Zoellick go, but it's nice that Negroponte is staying on and moving to a capacity which might allow him to live to fight another day. Don't be surprised to see him serve as a Secretary of State in a future Republican administration.

Why it went that way

Mario Loyola's post at the Corner today sheds a bit of light on the whole of Sadaam's trial and hanging that I tend to agree with. Could his final moments been better handled? I suppose so, but at the end of the day he got far better than he truly deserved. And that's the point:

Some have questioned why Saddam was executed on the basis of less than two hundred murders when he was responsible for hundreds of thousands losing their lives. The answer is not just that the particular crime in question was so easily traceable through documentary evidence to Saddam's personal agency, but also that it is important for people to see that even a crime this "small" justifies this punishment.

None of this has to do with the due process rights normally presumed for an individual criminal defendant in a state proceeding where there is a vital concern to protect individual rights from the power of the state. War criminals use the power of the state to commit their crimes. By abusing the powers of state, they opt out of the protections of state. The Allies would have been fully within their rights under customary international law to put the senior Nazi leaders in front of firing squads without any judicial process at all. Indeed, among the Allies, many senior leaders worried about the restraining precedent that would be set by the Nuremberg trials, which arguably went far beyond the sensible requirements of humanist and ethical restraint. The Nuremberg trials were show-trials in the best sense. Their purpose was not justice, but publicity, as Eisenhower appreciated.

The Iraqis who conducted the trial and execution of Saddam behaved with more restraint than I would have been inclined to show him. He was lucky that he was not tortured to death and buried in an unmarked grave, as many Iraqis would have liked to see. He was given more justice than a summary execution not to protect his dignity but to protect our own, and so that all could see real justice being served for real crimes.

What is most shocking to me about war critics who dismiss his execution is the ease with which they wave away the hundreds and thousands of hours of real torture—and I don't mean waterboarding, but rather sulfuric acid poured in the eyes, electric shock on the genitals, digits ripped from the hand with pliers, and worse—which Saddam inflicted on tens of thousands of innocents in Iraq. In today's Boston Globe, Jeff Jacoby remembers more of Saddam's horror stories. You need a heart of stone not to be consumed with hatred for Saddam.

As Peretz suggests, Saddam has earned an eternity of torment. The debate over the decorum of his execution makes me wonder, as Christopher Hitchens has, whether we really understand the brutality of our enemies—and whether we ourselves are capable of the brutality which may be necessary to defeat them.

'S' is for Snide

Given the way critics of everything that George W. Bush has ever done think we ought to prosecute the greater war on terror, I couldn't help but think that this ought to be more than praiseworthy:

The person believed to have recorded Saddam Hussein's execution on a cell phone camera was arrested Wednesday, an adviser to Iraq's prime minister said.

I mean, this is how it ought to be done, no? After the heinous act, we arrest and prosecute the culprit, right?

But apparently that's not quite right...nor good enough.

Body Counters

Don Surber makes a powerful observation about civilian deaths in Iraq:

With 16,273 deaths in 2006, is Iraq still at war? AP called fighting in the Sudan "the world's worst humanitarian crisis" after the U.N. estimated 200,000 people died violently since 2003 -- or twice the carnage of Iraq in the same time period.

Sudan's population is estimated at 6.5 million; Iraq's is four times that.

By the way, the 16,273 violent deaths in 2006 compares favorably to the 600,000 documented deaths under Saddam Hussein. Many more are likely.

Hussein's carnage averaged 70 to 125 civilian deaths every day for the 8,000 days he reigned. His 20,000 civilian deaths a year (on average) were considered "peace" while last year, under war, there were 14,298 civilians deaths.

The perils of the Sequel

I'm a firm believer that you don't do a sequel (especially a 4th or 5th) more than 10 years after the last film, and certainly not 20 years after the original. But what do I know.

Meanwhile, Sly has given us Rocky Balboa and is working on a Rambo V project and trailers for Die Hard IV have snuck into theatres already.

Limbo

If the City Council actually voted last night, the only people who know the outcome were there in the room. Neither the Record nor KSBY are reporting the decision that was expected from last night's meeting.

From what I can gather, there were a moment or two of high drama: Lompoc resident Alice Milligan, a lead opponent, opened her Tuesday statements by calling on Mayor Dick DeWees to step down from voting on the center. She said that DeWees, as a member of the Lompoc Recovery Task Force, was involved in selecting the 608 West Ocean location, currently home to the Avenue Flower Shop.

DeWees replied that he was not involved in the search for the location, and City Attorney Sharon Stuart stated that no impropriety existed with DeWees joining three other council members to vote as part of council on the issue. Council woman Ann Ruhge, who approved the project in November as a member of the planning commission, recused herself from the vote.

Later, in her comments, Good Samaritan Executive Director Sylvia Barnard addressed criticisms rather straight-on:

Plans for the center call for a modular building that would be near the existing flower shop building. Milligan said having a modular building next to Spanish architecture is poor planning, and would contribute to lowering the surrounding property values.

Good Samaritan Executive Director Sylvia Barnard responded to concerns over property values by presenting how existing detox centers in Santa Maria have failed to decrease property values in the areas of that city. She also responded to concerns from neighborhood residents near the proposed Lompoc location.

“Will we be good neighbors,” she said before citing a quote from the Institute for Public Health Strategies. “Those who live next to existing treatment programs consistently say program residents are great neighbors to have. It's only logical because those residents are the only people on the block who by regulation have to be good neighbors.”

Barnard also pointed to several modular buildings that exist in Ocean Avenue, despite opponents saying there were none, and used a map to cite the large number of bars and liquor shops that dot areas where students traverse to and from their school campuses each day.

Spot on but the question is not accuracy but rather persuasiveness. On that score, I guess we wait 'til later in the day.

Flagging Hopes

My blogmate fits well it would seem in the group so ably described by Michael Yon here:

This war is strange. I never hear soldiers worried about their own morale sagging. Contrary, the war-fighters here are more concerned to bolster the morale of the people at home. Here in Kuwait, where the dining facilities are bedecked in Christmas decorations, soldiers stream in from Iraq on convoys and stream back north along those bomb-laden roads. The service members here are not all rear-echelon people who never see fighting or blood. Yet their overall morale obviously is high. Few of them know I am a writer, and so they speak freely at the tables around me. In Qatar, from which I’d just departed, I spoke with troops taking four-day R&R passes, some having just returned from the most dangerous parts of Iraq, and others heading straight back, and their overall morale was also very high. The morale at war is higher than I have ever seen it at home; makes me wonder what they know that most Americans seem to be missing.

Strange indeed. I don't know that Yon is right, likewise I don't know that the sum of mainstream reporting is correct about Iraq and the War at-large. Yet I'm amazed having listened last week to interviews with a number of milbloggers at the disconnect between what many on the ground see and interpret and what the rest of us are getting.

Yon hits it on the head with that close. What exactly accounts for such a difference? The perception of many who are daily dealing with Iraqi's and the myriad number of challenges there are far different than that from those who report about it and those who consume the reporting and those who make policy decisions. Why?

Meanwhile, Michael Ledeen offered this observation of Sadaam's hanging today:

I agree with Rich that the Iraqis botched the execution of Saddam. It was not the American way, it was the traditional way. In the course of writing a book about Naples, I read scores of accounts of hangings, and there's a copious English-language literature on such things as well, from which it emerges that Saddam's treatment—the insults, the jibes, the jokes, all those things that offend us—have long been part of the ritual. Remember the final scene in "Braveheart"? When the torturer has the crowd laughing with him about the agonies to which Mel Gibson is about to be subjected?

Not the American way...

The Legacy of Saddam's Hanging

The weekend's news of Saddam's death was greeted by this observer with a mental toast to the victory of good over evil. There is no denying the cosmic justice of this outcome.

But as the news of the circumstances surrounding the tyrant's execution began to emerge along with cell phone video, etc. I began to develop an all-too-familiar, unsettling feeling about the whole thing. In reading Belgravia Dispatch today, these feelings began to congeal and I suddenly recognized why it all felt so eerily familiar: we've gone and done it again. We've botched the unbotchable. In carrying out a positive mission, we've managed to fumble away the political goodwill that rightfully should accrue to the United States.

Gregory Djerejian thoughtfully writes:

Adnan Pachachi, speaking of Saddam's execution: “Either it’s terrible incompetence or it’s an act of revenge--a vendetta." Well, no, it was both Mr. Pachachi. It was terrible incompetence by the American overseers (is anyone surprised, after all, this was a Bush 43 supervised event?). And, too, it gave more the appearance of an act of revenge/vendetta than application of deliberate justice (see the guards chanting praise to Moktada al Sadr moments before Saddam was hung). Put simply, another major setback to Iraqi national reconciliation, it would appear, not to mention the U.S. national interest. As I recently wrote, this trial should have taken place in The Hague, or the U.S. should have better strived to recreate a more South African style Truth and Reconciliation Commission in tandem with the Iraqi authorities (yes, I know, this last easier said than done given the revanchist spirit among Iraq's Shi'a, especially post-Samarra mosque bombing, but that's yet another reason to have convened a properly constituted international tribunal where the proceedings wouldn't reek of victor's justice). Instead, as Glenn Greenwald aptly quips, "we can't even get a hanging right." Yes, this latest blunder frustrates immensely, with the grainy cell phone video footage of a vigilante-style execution in dark, dungeon-looking surroundings causing yet another body blow to America's repute in the (non-Kuwaiti) Arab world (can someone please dispense with the sad joke that is Karen Hughes' supposed stewardship of her public diplomacy outfit, for where is the damage control after Condi Rice's description of cluster munitions littering southern Lebanon as constituting the "birth pangs" of a New Middle East, or now, Hughes' silence after this latest fiasco?). But, in fairness, there is another grim reality here too, which is that spiraling events are overtaking us in Iraq at breakneck speed (while POTUS inexcusably dithers: "It's my job to listen to a lot of opinions and come up with a strategy that says we have a plan"). Much like the Iranian "diplomats" we handed back (apprehended at one of Mr. 80% Solution Abdul Aziz Hakim's complexes, reportedly specifically at Hadi al-Ameri's house, a leader of the Badr Organization, Hakim's militia!) because Maliki's government so insisted (though realistically we had little choice in the matter, all told), we were similarly barely able to exert control over the execution process, having apparently to fight to persuade Maliki's government to allow Saddam to be buried near his hometown, for instance, rather than in an unmarked grave.

It is this last point that I hope to elaborate upon in coming posts. Had I been an active blogger at the time the ISG Report came out, I would have passionately argued this very notion:

The Baker Commission was; for all intents and puposes, Tet.

No matter what this President now does or how he hopes to do it, Iraq is over for the United States. Rightly or wrongly. Bush no longer has the ability to meaningfully shape events on the ground. Surge the troops. Withdraw the troops. In the cities, or out. Take the offensive or hand things over to the Iraqis. None of it matters within the context of American objectives anymore because Bush no longer has the confidence of the American people, the support of a Democratic Congress, the international partners that could lend credibility to course corrections, the margin for error with the media and precious little control over the Maliki government. As the execution of Saddam underscores, we couldn't even influence the government to carry out this sentence in manner that would minimize sectarian passions, lend credibility to the act itself or serve as any sort of first step in healing the wounds which divide this country. The lesson and the advice from this corner is to find the cleanest, most responsible exit strategy, execute it flawlessly and hope for the best. We're done.