Where was the surge back in 2002?

OK, war has been going on for 5 years now. this year a big "surge" involving increased US troops in Iraq was commenced.

Can someone please tell me why we didn't do a surge in 2002?

Also, suppose the surge does bring about peace to the country. Then what? As soon as we leave, the country falls into immediate anarchy, chaos and civil war. These Sunni, Shii and Kurds do not want to live together in peace. We can referee them all we want, but as soon as we pack up and go home, they're right back at it again. So what is the use in being over there? Now we're stuck there for decades.

There's some sort of false hope that we can leave if only we train enough troops and the government gets its act together. What a joke! How many times to I have to say it? These people do NOT want to live together in peace. They never have. They never will.

The only solution is to partition the country into three autonomous regions. This will eventually come to pass - mark my words.

Hannity, clinton vs vitter

Hannity compared the Sen. Vitter scandal with that of B. Clinton's sex-with-intern scandal.

He says he wouldn't want to see a politician lose his office because the a sex scandal was exposed and/or used to blackmail him. If he makes amends with his family, then let him stay in office. His family and private life should be kept out of the public eye.

But Clinton's crime was not that he had a sex affair, but that he lied under oath. Hence his crime is completely different, and much worse than Vitter's.

However, when Clinton lied under oath it was simply to protect his personal life from public scrutiny - the very thing Hannity says a politician should be able to do. His willingness to lie under oath regarding a personal should not be used to extrapolate to his willingness to lie regarding matters of his office.

Nevertheless, Hannity continues to skewer Clinton for this crime of lying under oath to protect his privacy after having been cornered into a difficult and embarrassing position by republicans.

If Hannity's willing to forgive Vitter so long as he makes amends with his family, then he should apply the same forgiveness to Clinton for protecting his private life from republican political hack attacks.

Yet lying under oath is a crime regardless of the reason, one might say. Well, does Hannity skewer every criminal in the public spotlight? Of course not. You don't hear him giving Clinton nearly the same leeway as he did to convicted felon Scooter Libby.