F.U. (unit-of-measure or state of affairs in Iraq?)

There has been much in the media about the latest group of people who are beginning to see the light -- that Iraq is FUBAR -- most recently by Sen. John "drifting sideways" Warner, the Republican chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I'm about as impressed by this as I would be by someone telling me that water is wet but, as my brother used to say: "the more, the many-er". I don't know what Warner expects will change in three months ("if, after three months, the Iraqis have made no progress to calm ethnic violence and hasten reconstruction") but that segues nicely into this post by Atrios who, after a little review of his units-of-measure, says that the time for punting is past. We all know what needs to be done.

I know regulars understand this, but for those coming in late and wondering what all the discussion of Friedman Units of time is about, it began with FAIR pointing out that Friedman was forever labeling the next six months in Iraq as a critical, decisive time. But the real issue isn't about prognostication, but about the perpetual punting of The Iraq Question to a future date. It allows the pundit, or politician, to seem Real Concerned About The War without actually bothering to take it seriously.

George Bush is president. He is incompetent and a bit nuts. He is in charge of running the war. One half an F.U. or a full F.U. or even four F.U.s from now things in Iraq will be pretty much as they are, only a bit worse. If you are concerned about things in Iraq you'll stop furrowing your brow while pontificating about how we're, once again, At A Really Critical Moment, and start accepting the fact that the only thing which could possibly improve things is new leadership. This involves, at the very least: the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld and his replacement by a competent person, the resgination of Condi Rice and her replacement by a competent person, the permanent relegation of Dick Cheney to an undisclosed location far away from any actual power to make decisions, the replacement of the current military leadership who have been chosen for their loyalty to their incompetent civilian leaders, and the election of Democrats to Congress who can hopefully engage in some of the meaningful oversight that the Republicans have shown no interest in having in order to force some of these changes.

I didn't back this war, but those who did have an extra moral responsibility to the troops they sent there, their families, and the people of Iraq to prevent President Bush from continuing his incompetent leadership there. But most of them don't. They continue to punt the issue one F.U. at a time, while their little sociopathic brains dream of ponies.

One F.U. from now, what are you going to suggest we do differently? If you don't have a realistic answer to that, then I politely suggest you S.T.F.U.