A vote for Lieberman

was a vote for more war.

He lied his way through that campaign and tried to claim he had a way to get the troops out of Iraq. In truth he was willing to do whatever was necessary to save face and make him look right all along. If that means thousands more have to die so he can rest easier at night (an insane notion), so be it.

In this disgraceful op=ed he claims that the war is winnable because of the "coming together of moderate political forces" in Baghdad (you know, like when Ayatollah Sistani said "screw you, I'm not throwing Muqtada al-Sadr under the bus).

He claims that the lack of security in the country is due to "a conscious strategy by al-Qaeda and Iran," two entities that sit on the divide between Sunni and Shia, groups that hate one another (I wonder if we'll see the media with their knives out for Lieberman like they were for Silvestre Reyes when he got the question wrong about which kind of Islam al-Qaeda practiced).

He claims that every soldier he met wanted to send more troops, despite yesterday's AP story which had troops on the record (and not simply rhetorical devices by a deluded Senator) rejecting any call for additional forces.

I agree that we cannot abandon Iraq; we should open up our borders to any refugee who seeks asylum here, for starters. But we cannot abandon all reason by placing more troops to be policemen in the middle of a civil war, where they shoot at both sides (that's what Lieberman is advocating here). He's just the kind of person who thinks the military can solve all of our problems, despite being woefully unequipped and untrained to solve this one.

This is McCain and Lieberman's war now. There isn't bipartisan support for escalation; there's overwhelming support against it. And there ought to be.