Can at least the Dems be smart about "regime change" this time?

The Al-Maliki of 1963? Ngo Dinh Diem meeting Ike in 1957

Josh Marshall writes in The Shoe Drops 08/26/07:

Finally, unexpectedly, out of the blue even, we appear to have arrived at a grand cross-party consensus on Iraq: it's Nuri al Maliki's fault and he should be fired. Faced with the tough task of biting the bullet one way or another, pols across the partisan divide seem to have arrived at this as the one position they can get behind and push on the Sunday shows.

The Democrats need to shut up with their endorsements of this little regime-changing scheme that shows every appearance at the moment of rolling full-speed down the tracks.

If you don't like supporting Al-Maliki's government, then push for withdrawing the American troops supporting him against his Sunni opponents and intra-Shi'a opponents.

Since Bush has made Vietnam comparisons the latest hot thing, maybe it would be a good idea for some of the Dems to read up on the anti-Diem coup of 1963 and how much smoother things started going immediately after that. (NOT!!!) It's would be good for war supporters, too, if there are any left that can process information that isn't cheerleading.

As long as we're doing Vietnam War comparisons, you might as well look at some sane ones. Like Vietnam's real lessons by Andrew Bacevich Los Angeles Times 08/25/07. Or Bush's "Killing Fields" and the Real Lesson of Vietnam by Gareth Porter Huffington Post 08/23/07.

Tags: iraq war