posted November 06, 2007 01:08 PM            

November 06, 2007
The Deranged Left, Part CCLIXII
Rick Moran

Over the last two days, there have been two jaw dropping examples of how truly deranged the left has become.

First, this piece appeared on the front page of Daily Kos. It is self-explanatory:

As U.S. casualties have continued to drop, many people on the anti-Bush side of the aisle have begun to quietly panic in recent days over this question: “Could George W. Bush and Frederick Kagan have possibly been right about the surge?”

The fact that Democrats and the left would "panic" over winning the war tells you all you need to know about the shockingly cockeyed priorities the left holds regarding America. They would rather see us lose in Iraq than shown to be wrong.

Not to be outdone, the original "moonbat" - George Monbiot - pens a piece for Alternet in which he dearly hopes that we go into a deep recession:

I recognise that recession causes hardship. Like everyone I am aware that it would cause some people to lose their jobs and homes. I do not dismiss these impacts or the harm they inflict, though I would argue that they are the avoidable results of an economy designed to maximise growth rather than welfare.

What I would like you to recognise is something much less discussed: that, beyond a certain point, hardship is also caused by economic growth.

Hardship caused by economic growth? Apparently, poor Mother Earth can't take all this economic success:

On Sunday I visited the only UN biosphere reserve in Wales: the Dyfi estuary. As is usual at weekends, several hundred people had come to enjoy its beauty and tranquillity and, as is usual, two or three people on jet skis were spoiling it for everyone else.

Most economists will tell us that human welfare is best served by multiplying the number of jet skis. If there are two in the estuary today, there should be four there by this time next year and eight the year after. Because the estuary's beauty and tranquillity don't figure in the national accounts (no one pays to watch the sunset) and because the sale and use of jet skis does, this is deemed an improvement in human welfare.

Perhaps they could ban jet skis. So what's the solution?

The massive improvements in human welfare --better housing, better nutrition, better sanitation and better medicine -- over the past 200 years are the result of economic growth and the learning, spending, innovation and political empowerment it has permitted. But at what point should it stop?

In other words, at what point do governments decide that the marginal costs of further growth exceed the marginal benefits? Most of them have no answer to this question. Growth must continue, for good or ill. It seems to me that in the rich nations we have already reached the logical place to stop.

You read that last part correctly. Mr. Moonbat wants economic growth to "stop." Of course, the consequences would be predictable:

But because political discourse is controlled by people who put the accumulation of money above all other ends, this policy appears to be impossible. Unpleasant as it will be, it is hard to see what except an accidental recession could prevent economic growth from blowing us through Canaan and into the desert on the other side.

That's the ticket. Let's stop economic growth, dive into a ruinous depression, and have everyone live off the government dole as God intended.

posted November 06, 2007 01:12 PM            

Congressman David Obey (D-WI) has a novel explanation for the large drop in casualties in Iraq. He believes that the terrorists and sectarian thugs are running out of people to kill:

“There are fewer targets of opportunity,” Obey said in a speech to the National Press Club.

Obey was responding to a question about reports touted by Republicans that security is improving in Iraq and that President Bush’s “surge” strategy is working. He stressed that military success has not led to political reconciliation. “The issue has never been military,”

Obey said. “The issue has always been political improvement.” As the House’s top appropriator, Obey has his hands on the nation’s purse strings, giving him a significant say on the war in Iraq.

Remarkable stupidity, even from a Congressman. Obey, you may recall, yelled at a constituent a few months ago who was questioning his support for earmarks, telling him in effect it was none of his business.

And according to Michael Yon, whose on the ground reporting from Iraq was recently used by CNN, Obey is dead wrong. Nightlife is returning to Baghdad and the surrounding areas and stores are opening up all over the place. If the terrorists needed any "targets of opportunity," they certainly wouldn't have to look very far.

posted November 06, 2007 02:31 PM            

Seven U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq on Monday, the U.S. military said, making 2007 the deadliest year for U.S. forces in the country.

The deaths, one of the highest daily tolls in weeks, took the number of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq this year to 853. The worst previous year was 2004, when 849 deaths were recorded.

In total, 3,856 U.S. soldiers have been killed since the U.S.-led invasion to topple Saddam Hussein in 2003.

"We lost five soldiers yesterday in two unfortunate incidents, both involving IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices)," U.S. military spokesman Rear Admiral Greg Smith told reporters in Baghdad on Tuesday.

The military said both attacks took place in Kirkuk province near the volatile oil-refining city of Baiji, 180 km (112 miles) north of Baghdad. In the worst incident, four soldiers were killed when a roadside bomb exploded near their vehicle.

A sixth soldier was killed in western Anbar province, once one of the most dangerous places in Iraq for U.S. troops but now seen as a success story for U.S. President George W. Bush's new Iraq strategy since Sunni tribes there turned against al Qaeda.

A sailor was also killed on Monday in an explosion during operations in Salahuddin province, the military said.

U.S. forces in Iraq say a major build-up of troops since February has helped stem sectarian violence and reduced the number of insurgent attacks on coalition forces.

Lieutenant-General Raymond Odierno, the second-ranking U.S. commander in Iraq, told a Pentagon briefing last week there had been a five-month decline in combat deaths.

Odierno said insurgent attacks had been on a steady downward trend since June, with roadside bomb blasts in particular sharply down in the last four months.

Independent Web site icasualties.org, which monitors U.S. troop deaths, said 38 U.S. soldiers were killed in October, the lowest death toll since March 2006.

The deadliest month so far in 2007 was May, when 126 U.S. soldiers were killed, and the deadliest quarter was April to June, when 331 died.

U.S. forces completed their build-up of an extra 30,000 troops in mid-June and swiftly launched a series of military operations against al Qaeda in Iraq, other Sunni Arab militants and Shi'ite militia groups around Baghdad.

Troops were moved out of their large bases into smaller combat outposts in neighborhoods. Soldiers also went into areas previously viewed as no-go zones, exposing them to frequent roadside bomb and sniper attacks that took a deadly toll. (Writing by Ross Colvin; Additional reporting by David Cutler; Editing by Ibon Villelabeitia)

posted November 07, 2007 12:31 PM            

He just stated there was no one left to kill in Iraq...and that's the reason casualties are down as well as Iraqi civilian casualties.