[mburbank]

Preech, I don't usually think you are so off base, but I feel as if you must have read somebody elses post. You know, like I did that one time?

I don't think I equated Sadr and Al Quaeda beyond the fact that they both suck and they both kill people. Sadr seems to be all about killing Sunnis. Al Quaeda, I think, prefers killing us, but will happily kill anyone they think is in our boat. I guess I'd equate them this way. They are both against a democratically elected government of unity that would look kindly on the US of A.

"Now, you are hinting that Maliki is secretly somehow not actually rabidly kissing Sadr's, Iminajihad's and Asshat's respective asses."

Was I? Is this about thinking Killing Sadr might be a good idea? Please recall that I'm only in favor of that if our government is still stuck on the idea of making this government... well, real. If sadr were gone, it would give maliki on less puppetmaster.

Personally I think Maliki borders on irrelivant. He's beyond ass kissing, he doesn't exist in an real way.

You say we need to 'get the job done' 'cause it's 'our mess'. I totally agree it's our mess. What's your (as opposed to the many and various out there) deffinition of getting the job done?

'Cause I think if we want to get a stable government there, we got two equally ugly choices.

A.) Re-occupation, and this time do it with a full and brutal multi year commitment. Basically, force unity government down their throats until they get used to it. I don't see how we can possibly do this while maintaining that Iraq has sovereignity or that the Mailiki government is an actual, functioning entity.

B.) Embrace the idea of Iraq as a Shiite country and back them.

If you see another option, let me know.

My prediction? We do neither and are forced to make this same choice or decide to leave in a few months when the government either collapses outright, or such heinous activities come to light that even thin veneer of legitimacy it currently has vanishes.