CHENEY HAS LIEBERMAN REPRISE "ANYONE CAN GO TO BAGHDAD; REAL MEN GO TO TEHRAN" WHILE MORE REPUBLICANS ABANDON BUSH'S IRAQ AGENDA

Somehow the Senate-- with no deliberation whatsoever-- passed some kind of cockamamie condemnation of Iran last week. Bush had Lieberman bum rush the Senate with an amendment to set the stage for an attack. Don't ask me why every single Democrat-- including Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy, and Russ Feingold-- voted for it. Not one stood up to this! As R.J. Eskow explained at Huff Po Friday, it appears reasonable on the surface but "lays the groundwork for a new attack that could turn pro-Western Iranians into anti-American terrorists. It passed just as a new poll confirms that the Iranian leadership's policies are wildly unpopular with their own people."

The Lieberman amendment sets the nation up for a Gulf of Tonkin moment-- one that can be used to justify military strikes against Iran, with the President reassuring the nation that he has bipartisan support... It asks for bimonthly reports from the military regarding "external support or direction provided to anti-coalition forces by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran or its agents ... the strategy and ambitions in Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran; and .... any counter-strategy or efforts by the United States Government to counter the activities of agents of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Iraq."

Yesterday's L.A. Times lays out the Saudi Arabian connection to Iraq's insurgency and civil war. But Lieberman hasn't offered an amendment to his bill to include Bush's Saudi business partners. "Although Bush administration officials have frequently lashed out at Syria and Iran, accusing it of helping insurgents and militias here, the largest number of foreign fighters and suicide bombers in Iraq come from a third neighbor, Saudi Arabia, according to a senior U.S. military officer and Iraqi lawmakers. About 45% of all foreign militants targeting U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians and security forces are from Saudi Arabia; 15% are from Syria and Lebanon; and 10% are from North Africa, according to official U.S. military figures made available to The Times by the senior officer. Nearly half of the 135 foreigners in U.S. detention facilities in Iraq are Saudis, he said. Fighters from Saudi Arabia are thought to have carried out more suicide bombings than those of any other nationality, said the senior U.S. officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity. It is apparently the first time a U.S. official has given such a breakdown on the role played by Saudi nationals in Iraq's Sunni Arab insurgency. He said 50% of all Saudi fighters in Iraq come here as suicide bombers. In the last six months, such bombings have killed or injured 4,000 Iraqis."

The context of this is the relentless Neocon battle within the Regime-- and led, of course, by Cheney-- to attack Iran. Today's Guardian reports that Cheney is making progress at the expense of the State and Defense Departments.

The balance in the internal White House debate over Iran has shifted back in favour of military action before President George Bush leaves office in 18 months, the Guardian has learned.

The shift follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although the Bush administration is in deep trouble over Iraq, it remains focused on Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: "Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo."

The Bush Regime's catastrophically inept handling of foreign policy has led directly to a tremendous increase of influence by Iran since the American people sat by complacently while Bush stole the 2000 election. Cheney wants to attack. Secretary of State Rice and Secretary of Defense Gates are both aware that he's completely lost his marbles. But Cheney's convinced Bush that none of his "potential successors in the White House, Republican or Democratic," can be trusted to deal with Iran decisively.

No doubt Bush would feel a lot calmer if Joe Lieberman were lined up to be the next president of the United States since he would wait less time than even Cheney to attack. Former Lieberman ally and Connecticut legislator Bill Curry, wrote an opinion piece in yesterday's Hartford Courant that traces the disgraceful and insidiously treacherous political career of Joe Lieberman. I suggest you read the whole thing at the link. Let me just pick it up when Al Gore made the biggest mistake of his political career, nominating Lieberman for the VP job. According to the polls it looked like it was working out-- until Lieberman debated Cheney on TV.

Cheney, as the world now knows, is a fanatic. No matter. Joe spent the evening making political small talk and Cheney came off like your friendly neighborhood pharmacist. Gore lost his lead that night and never got enough of it back.

Four years later, Joe ran for president on a platform of bipartisanship, civil discourse and war. Democrats despised the war and had long since figured out that Joe's bipartisanship meant nothing more than doing Bush's bidding. Joe got trampled.

He went on drifting right, but changed in other ways. He began attacking the motives of his adversaries, members mostly of his own party. This, more than anything, sparked the uprising that led to his primary defeat at the hands of novice Ned Lamont.

In the general election, Joe reassured war-weary voters that "I hear you." He lashed out at Lamont for saying otherwise. "I'm not for staying the course," he growled convincingly. "Nobody wants to get out of Iraq more than I do." Connecticut voters took him at his word, but it didn't work out as well for them as it had for the Miami Cubans.

Joe's "new course" is escalation. Smart of him not to mention that in any ads. He's one of Bush's two best spear carriers, the other being John McCain, currently being trampled by Republicans.

This past week, the White House issued an interim Iraq report. It claims progress on just eight of 18 "benchmarks" and stretches even for that. Iraq was supposed to complete a constitutional review, but gets a passing grade for forming the committee. And so on. To read it is to be sick at heart.

Unless, of course, you're Joe Lieberman, who says he read it and found nothing to cast the least doubt on our plan of action. In fact, he's now sure the war can only be lost by "defeatists at home."

Meanwhile, our intelligence says that since we invaded Iraq, al-Qaida has grown stronger, including in its capacity to strike us at home. It only confirms what we all should know: The war is a debacle. Each day we fail to end it endangers the life of every American, especially the soldiers we have sent and sent again to fight it.

The most important bipartisan movement in a generation is taking shape on Capitol Hill. But ironically, Joe Lieberman isn't part of it. Instead, he joins Bush in attacking the "defeatists." Yes, we've come to that phase of a war when disgraced leaders blame the outcome on those brave enough to oppose them. Sadly, Lieberman shows signs of giving in to the temptation.

Bill Curry doubt's the sincerity of Lieberman and Bush and Cheney don't trust the presidential candidates but yesterday Iraq Study Group Co-Chair, Lee Hamilton expressed no confidence in Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, the Bush puppet who is supposed to meet all those benchmarks.

"There is no chance that the Iraqi forces could take over at any time, or certainly by the first of the year," Hamilton said in a nationally broadcast interview. "All of the support efforts, logistical and medical and so forth, they are not close to being able to meet," Hamilton said.

"The most important is inclusivity," he added. "That is making sure that you include all elements of Iraqi society in the government," he said.

"They're not close at all. The president gave them a satisfactory rating. But all they've done is create a committee" to work on a host of legislative issues aimed at completing the transition from the Saddam Hussein era.

"I am extremely doubtful about it. He's had quite a bit of time now. He's known exactly what he's had to do. He hasn't done it. His rhetoric is pretty good. His performance is pretty bad," Hamilton said in an interview with on NBC's "Today" show.

This week's Newsweek sums is up the dilemna facing a Bush caught between his self-created Iraq disaster and his own stubborn and irresponsible petulance. The rational people embedded with or allied to the Bush Regime are looking around for the exits-- for America in Iraq and for themselves for soured relationships with Bush.

How do you manage the process of losing a war? Americans don't like the word "defeat"; certainly, President George W. Bush won't be caught using it. He continues to talk of victory in Iraq, to insist that anything less is unacceptable. But his circle of true believers seems to be getting ever smaller. It may be limited to Vice President Dick Cheney, maybe a military commander or two and a few diehard senators. For everyone else in a position of authority over the war effort, there seems to be a grim recognition that Iraq is a lost cause, or very nearly so. The real question is not whether America can win, but rather how to get out.

It is a dilemma without a right answer. Pull out now and abandon thousands of Iraqis to their deaths. Stay in and doom a smaller but still-significant number of American troops, while probably just postponing the day of reckoning, the seemingly inevitable bloodbath as Iraq collapses into full-scale civil war. And what, exactly, would withdrawal look like? Americans still remember the desperate images of the fall of Saigon—the iconic helicopter on the roof. Would Iraqis who cast their lot with the American "liberators" be seen clinging to tanks as they pull out of Baghdad?

Newsweek even has a cute interactive graphic that shows which rubber stamp rats up for re-election are thinking of jumping off Bush's sinking ship next. Remember, "to overcome a presidential veto, at least 18 Republicans [in the Senate] will have to join with the Democrats to vote for legislation changing course on Iraq. As of now, fewer than a dozen Republicans are ready to bolt."