Baghdad Embassy Plans Appear on Internet

At least that's his plan.

It's really a morally ambiguous issue, though. I mean-- this is America's mess, shouldn't America clean it up? As much as it was a mistake to go in, I don't think it's right for the U.S. to just high-tail it. That said, I think there is a better way to help Iraq rebuild than keeping a significant military presence.

yeah and thats an neo arguement to keep us there(i know thats not your point, but when you get them with no wmds, no terror links they fall back on good ole human spirit and kindness.. we did this we need to fix it as a way to justify their current actions that do not bring us closer to that goal) but you dont rebuild an arab country with gi joe
you dont rebuild a country by giving a bunch of cost plus no bid contracts to kbr that give them exceptive to take as long and make it as expensive as possible even if that means destroying working equipment.
You dont rebuild a country by not hiring any of it's citizens for labor.

noone is saying run from iraq and ignore it.. there simply is nomore military solution left. Saddam is dead. We need to higher iraqi companies to rebuild iraq and america be more of a supportive roll.

right now we have our own military training the insurgents that will fight them.. the people we train by day, shoot at us at night.

NOONE IS SAYING GET OUT OF IRAQ AND LET IT BE. We know full well the truths in the powell statement "you break it, you own it" we own the problem and staying the course just makes the mess bigger and harder to clean up.

last you dont make sure that your embassy the size of the Vatican and the largest and most secure embassy in the world is the only project on time.
How would we feel with an embassy the size of the vatican in our country for say china.

Brian, your points are more than valid. But, just echoing what Joules said, we aren't going to establish a democracy in that country via the barrel of a gun. The Iraqis want us out, pure and simple, and we need to abide by that.

Personally, here's how I look at it (YMMV). There are some very bright minds on Newsvine (believe me, I trust 'viners a helluva lot more than the MSM), and I have yet to see a plan for staying that looks like it'd work. We've lost so much credibility with Iraqis, Muslims, aw hell, the whole world, that even if we send a non-Wolfowitz-esque-boob to help, I don't know what can be done. The trust is gone.

So I see Iraq as an investment, one that's been paid in blood, money, and blood money. I see it as pets.com. The idea was ludicrous, it's been poorly managed, and a sock puppet is its spokesman. At some point, you have to pull out or you ride it down to zero. As a portfolio manager in a past life, it was always a helluva lot smarter to cut your losses, or set a stop-loss level. We've hit that stop-loss so, so many times. It's a bad investment, and it's time to get out. Otherwise, we're just going to lose more money and soldier's lives.

Just to echo something I said in my previous post:

That said, I think there is a better way to help Iraq rebuild than keeping a significant military presence.

I'm with you on this. Militarily, the US is doing more harm than good-- and causing more harm than good to be done. That said, when (I'm confident) the 'coalition' forces do get out, it is going to be a very sticky situation that we're all going to have to remain involved with.

With the soldiers gone, there will be an impulse to forget the whole incident and move on, and to a large degree, I think people will. I think it's important to fight that urge, and try to solve the problem. Again, I'm not proposing that a military presence is maintained.

Errr, yeah, you did. *looks behind, searching for a quick exit*

Sorry, that post, like many others this time of night, was interrupted, and I didn't cleanly finish my dismount.

The problem is, if you don't have enforcers of some sort there, who did you give financial aid to, for example? This administration treats the GAO like used toilet paper, so they'll never count for much. And the Iraqis have learned, and learned well, all the tricks to graft and embezzlement. We're already bleeding money there, so I don't see that helping. We have no consultative credibility. What's left that the US, or even UN, can do? Anything? Iraqis are pretty damned tired of outsiders, I do believe. And with a civil war raging?

I dunno. I don't have any ideas outside of the Iraqis figuring it out for themselves. The US, Iran, and Saudi Arabia (and Syria, Lebanon, Israel) are gonna throw money at it regardless, but I believe that it'll take Iraqis to find a solution. Then the best thing we can do is recognize whatever government that rises from the charred ashes of our making.

Re the Iraqi's wanting America out. Their 'democratic' govt has said as much, you just were'nt told until the American Govt had it's reactionary mouthpieces ready to go. The Iraq Govt has asked for a timetable.

The Baghdad Bush Oasis has far more to do with egos and profit objectives than any thinking. These guys can't keep track of anything. Not the White House e-mails, not money, not intelligence and not the plans to the most highly sensitive, embassy security plans. No wonder the box cutters foiled National Defenses. Idiots!

I can only hope that the internet can be a source of comment on why the United States needs to build the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad.

Well, the US is the most powerful country in the world, currently, so what other nation should have the largest? And if it's going to have it, where else should it have it but in Iraq? The size of the thing is sort of a non-story. It's the (apparently) leaking that's the thing...

"Freedom of the Press" be damned

So I guess the First Amendment doesn't mean much to you.

Suffice to say that I think the First Amendment is secondary to the power and force that makes it tenable. First things first.

I say you got that backwards.

The power and force are unfortunately necessary to preserve freedoms like the First Amendment.

The power and force are unfortunately necessary to preserve freedoms like the First Amendment.

First the necessary, unfortunate or not, then the luxury, yes?

Beyond a pure state of Hobbesian nature, almost everything worth doing, even art, occurs behind a wall granted to us by perpetually maligned soldiers and police standing ready. First the wall, then the peace, at least until that tomorrow which most likely will never come.

I think it's irresponsible for the AP to report even minimally on this breach of security. "Freedom of the Press" be damned. If this was online for even only a brief period of time, please keep quiet about it.

You know, if The Onion or Colbert said the exact same thing, many would find it howlingly funny because it would be such insightful satire of American knee-jerk xenophobic state worship.

At some point, and we are well beyond such a point, any pretense to intellectual objectivity has to give way to cultural prejudice.

Classic. All you need to do is keep your audience on the fence about whether you're serious, and you have a career in comedy waiting for you.

But sadly, you're completely serious, aren't you? Which ruins to joke completely.

Yes Dennis, hurry and finish them all in jail before the power of The Painter is revealed to be stronger than anything used to defend NeoCons in their Bat Cave! :~)