MILITARY UNSURE WHETHER OR NOT DOWNING OF 4 HELICOPTERS IN 2 WEEKS IS A THREAT TO U.S. AVIATION IN IRAQ

A couple weeks ago I explained why I thought the widespread introduction of shoulder fired ground to air missiles would mean the Iraq occupation would probably end before the U.S. Senate got finished parsing the words needed to start the process of doing what the American people are demanding they do. But like so much of the tragedy inherent in the Bush Regime, reality isn't recognized when it knocks on the door-- only when it pulverizes the whole house.

Today's Washington Post shows a hidebound military Establishment unable to even deal with the fact that their helicopters are being shot down. I don't mean they are unable to defend against the shooters; I mean they can't even come to grips that they have a problem!

Bush's Saudi allies have opened the floodgates of money and weapons to their Sunni brethren and Bush's pals' co-religionists are what we call "terrorists" and "insurgents." Since January 20, these insurgents have shot down 4 U.S. helicopters, killing 20 Americans. The U.S. military says it's "unclear whether this represents any new threat to U.S. aviation." Before you can cure a problem, you've got to recognize you even have a problem. Independent thinking isn't something encouraged by the Bush Regime and even in the military, when officers have questioned ideological premises set out by the Neocons with whom Bush has surrounded himself, they have been fired, their careers destroyed.

In late 2003, the U.S. ordered changes in air tactics, including flying lower and faster to confuse insurgent gunners and varying routes.

The United States has lost more than 50 helicopters in Iraq since May 2003, about half of them to hostile fire. But the loss of four helicopters in two weeks has raised new questions about whether Iraqi insurgents are using more sophisticated weapons or whether U.S. tactics need changing.

Maybe it's time for another change? Like leaving. Yes, leaving; not Bush's phony stay-the-course non-plan that even its authors say will fail. Failure doesn't mean much for Bush. His place in history is already guaranteed: the worst president ever, and an illegitimate one at that. Polling numbers? What, he'll go for an approval rating of 28% to 23%? Who cares? There'll always been some imbeciles in Utah and Idaho who support him no matter what he does to our nation. But failure does mean something-- the ultimate something-- for families with loved ones fighting this pointless rich man's war.

The success of the Bush administration's new Iraq strategy depends on a series of rapid and dramatic political and economic reforms that even the plan's authors have little confidence will work.

In the current go-for-broke atmosphere, administration officials say they are aware that failure to achieve the reforms would result in a repeat of last year's unsuccessful Baghdad offensive, when efforts to consolidate military gains with lasting stability on the ground did not work. This time, they acknowledge, there will be no second chance... A pessimistic new National Intelligence Estimate released Friday described the Iraqi government as "hard-pressed" to achieve sectarian reconciliation, even in the unlikely event that violence diminishes. Without directly mentioning Maliki, it noted that "the absence of unifying leaders among the Arab Sunni or Shia with the capacity to speak for or exert control over their confessional groups limits prospects."

Sounds similar to the problem Republicans are having in the U.S. Senate, with the Bush Regime's #1 bitch, Mitch, having to crawl to a far right talk show host and plead for him to stop telling wingnuts to defeat Republican incumbents who follow their constituents' demands to block Bush's escalation.


UPDATE: THERE WILL BE MANY UPDATES. TODAY FOR EXAMPLE...

CNN reports that a U.S. military transport helicopter crashed Wednesday northwest of Baghdad, killing all seven crew members and passengers on board. Fell right out of the sky, it did.