by TChris

A hidden cost of the war in Iraq, a cost you won't hear Republicans talk about as they run for reelection:

Nearly one in five soldiers leaving the military after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been at least partly disabled as a result of service, according to documents of the Department of Veterans Affairs obtained by a Washington research group. ...

"The trend is ominous," said Paul Sullivan, director of programs for Veterans for America, an advocacy group, and a former V.A. analyst. Mr. Sullivan said that if the current proportions held up over time, 400,000 returning service members could eventually apply for disability benefits when they retired.

Perhaps the president could explain how he intends to pay the war's hidden costs as he urges voters to vote Republican to save their tax cuts. The cost, of course, isn't solely borne by the taxpayer. The disabled soldiers and their families pay a price that can't be measured. Voting for "stay the course" Republicans assures that the number of disabled veterans will continue to climb.

by TChris

Does the president ever think about the pain he has rendered in Iraq? The shattered families, the missing fathers, the widows and orphans left behind? Does he believe no accounting is due for the innocent lives lost? Does he feel no sorrow, no responsibility, for the relentless march of death that defines Iraq today?

In the new study, researchers attempt to calculate how many more Iraqis have died since March 2003 than one would expect without the war. Their conclusion, based on interviews of households and not a body count, is that about 600,000 died from violence, mostly gunfire. ... ''Deaths are occurring in Iraq now at a rate more than three times that from before the invasion of March 2003,'' Dr. Gilbert Burnham, lead author of the study, said in a statement.

The president's supporters will dispute the "controversial" study, but even if deaths now occur at only twice the pre-invasion rate, the consequences of the invasion to the Iraqi people have been monstrous. How can the president expect Americans to feel anything other than shame for his reckless conduct of our foreign affairs?

by TChris

As the military redeploys troops to hold Baghdad, it's in danger of losing the rest of the country.

"We do not have sufficient troop strength to secure the entire country simultaneously," Andrew Krepinevich, a military analyst, said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. "Trying to be strong everywhere will lead us to being strong nowhere."

Meanwhile, we're told that the administration's policy isn't to "stay the course" -- a prospect that looks bleak no matter how often the president repeats the mantra. Instead, the policy is "constantly being adjusted." Is this the latest version of the "adapt to win" slogan that never seemed to gain traction?

The Washington Post reports the number of wounded troops in Iraq is growing significantly.

More than 20,000 U.S. troops have been wounded in combat in the Iraq war, and about half have returned to duty. While much media reporting has focused on the more than 2,700 killed, military experts say the number of wounded is a more accurate gauge of the fierceness of fighting because advances in armor and medical care today allow many service members to survive who would have perished in past wars. The ratio of wounded to killed among U.S. forces in Iraq is about 8 to 1, compared with 3 to 1 in Vietnam.

It looks like Rumsfeld was wrong again:

(Guest Post from Big Tent Democrat)

Another cut and runner:

It is time to call an end to the tests, the six-month trials, the waiting and watching, and to recognize that the Iraqi government has failed. It is also time to face the terrible reality that America's mission in Iraq has substantially failed.

Unfortunately, and tragically, there can be no doubt this is true. There is no hope for success as promised by the Bush Administration. There never was. But it is worse than that. We now have an unmitigated disaster. The action to take now is to deal with this fact and start working on the consequences of this monumental Bush failure. The time for thinking about what to do starts November 8, after the elections. why? Because Bush, supported blindly by the Rubber Stamp Republicans, will not deal with reality. And if the Republicans hold both houses of Congress next January, then the planning can't start until 2009 at the earliest. Because Bush won't do it and congressional Republicans will not either.

by TChris

Hundreds of Iraqi police officers were poisoned at their base during their evening meal today.

An official with the Environment Ministry said 11 policemen had died. However, the governor of Wasit province -- where the poisoning took place -- denied any deaths, though he said some of the victims were in critical condition. There was no immediate explanation for the contradictory reports. Some of the policemen began bleeding from the ears and nose after the meal ....

Food and water are provided to the base by an Australian firm. Whether the poisoning was deliberate or accidental is under investigation.

by TChris

Incidents like this one explain why the Bush administration's battle to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis has been lost:

Saying he was unable to stop the bloodshed, a Navy corpsman testified that Marines in his patrol seized an Iraqi civilian from his home, threw him into a hole and shot him at least 10 times after growing frustrated in their search for an insurgent. Slight and soft-spoken, Petty Officer 3rd Class Melson J. Bacos said Friday he saw a Marine put fingerprints from the victim onto a rifle and a shovel to implicate him as an insurgent. ...

Bacos said he asked the Marines to let Awad go, but Cpl. Marshall L. Magincalda told him in crude terms that he was being weak and should stop protesting.

According to this story, some of the Marines involved are trying to negotiate plea agreements now that Bacos has rolled over on them. Others argue that Bacos invented the story to save himself. Bacos received an extraordinarily favorable deal in exchange for his cooperation in the prosecution of the Marines.

(Guest Post from Big Tent Democrat)

Beating Atrios to the punch:

The chairman, Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, expressed particular concern that Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki had not moved decisively against sectarian militias.

"In two or three months if this thing hasn't come to fruition and this level of violence is not under control, I think it's a responsibility of our government to determine: Is there a change of course we should take?" Senator Warner said.

What's the rest of the "Broder independent center" Party (McCain, Graham, Lieberman) have to say about this? Hey Joe, isn't this emboldening the "terrorist bloggers" or something? Or maybe I should be asking Broder that question?

(Guest Post from Big Tent Democrat)

The Washington Post Editorial Board says:

We continue to agree with Mr. Bush that it would be wrong and dangerous for U.S. troops simply to withdraw. But it is also dangerous when leaders such as Mr. Bush, Vice President Cheney and Mr. Rumsfeld continue to resist reality.

But the problem with this formulation is that Messrs. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld run this Debacle. It would be wrong to simply withdraw says WaPo. Whether that would be true with a competent Administration in place is highly debatable (full disclosure, I opposed the Iraq Debacle from the moment it was first mooted in 2002). But it seems difficult to argue that as long as the Bush Administration is in charge, that an exit strategy is not imperative.

Ironically, the Post's own editorial lays out why this is the case:

Looks like it's not going to happen. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld today said he is not thinking of resigning and Bush has reiterated his support of him in recent days. He also addressed Bob Woodward's book allegations.

He said he had spoken to Bush since the book's contents were made public. Bush "called me personally," said Rumsfeld, to voice support.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

Credit where due, Fox News anchor Shephard Smith does a great job on pointing out to Bill Kristol that the Emperor Bush Has No Clothes.

A Daily Kos diarist has the transcript :

Newsweek has an exclusive 11 page excerpt of Bob Woodward's book, State of Denial, with the secondary headline,

It was Bush's decision. But Rumsfeld drove the dynamic on Iraq. How the SecDef blew it.

More from Newsweek: The White House is in full damage control over Woodward's book.