Informed Speculation

Who is he? All you and I need to know is that he’s the most frequent poster on the Daily Kos (is he a co-founder? Heavy investor? Markos’s long-lost cousin? Ted Kennedy’s pseudonym? Who cares? Oh, all right, if you insist, you can read about Armando here and here – but trust me, you’ll learn nothing of substance), and more importantly, his work is so consistently devoid of logic and loaded with vulgarity and venom that he is surely in the running for the Internet’s most repulsive personality.

His latest makes him Jackass-worthy for two reasons: it’s symptomatic of his childish worldview, and it’s the stupidest thing you’ll likely read this weekend (or any weekend, for that matter):

The latest “traitor” — the U.S. commander in Iraq, General Casey:

The top U.S. commander in Iraq has submitted a plan to the Pentagon for withdrawing troops in Iraq, according to a senior defense official.

Gen. George Casey submitted the plan to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It includes numerous options and recommends that brigades — usually made up of about 2,000 soldiers each — begin pulling out of Iraq early next year.

Arrest that man! He’s is cutting and running! Emboldening the terrorists!

How many flaws can such a short piece have? Let’s count them:

1. No one is calling for Murtha to be arrested.

2. No one is calling Murtha a traitor.

3. The military plans for every possible scenario. The military has seven back-up plans in place for changing a flat tire. Of course, they have a plan for withdrawal. This is not the same as an ORDER to withdraw, or even to begin withdrawing.

4. George W. Bush is the Commander-In-Chief; while he listens to the General, it is his call.

5. Armando, naturally, provides such a short excerpt so that you don’t get confused by any ‘details’ – details such as these:

Pentagon and U.S. military officials tell NBC News the plan calls for the substantial withdrawal of more than 60,000 troops from Iraq.

…If Iraqi elections are successful in December and a new parliament seated by January, withdrawal could begin almost immediately. Military officials say it would be an incremental or phased withdrawal — beginning slowly at first, with one or two battalions — up to 2,000 troops at a time…

In fact, the withdrawal plan relies heavily on the ability of Iraqi forces to take over their own security. But out of 96 Iraqi army battalions today, only one can conduct operations without U.S. military help.

“If you can’t leave until the Iraqis are ready to defend themselves, and you don’t know how good they are at that, then you don’t know when you’re leaving,” says Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute.

And this would be far short of a total withdrawal. It would still leave 90,000-100,000 American troops in Iraq at the end of next year.

“We won’t totally come out of Iraq for five years or so, until we are sure that it wont result in a giant civil war upon our withdrawal,” says Barry McCaffrey, a retired U.S. Army general and an NBC News military analyst.

Despite all the political turmoil, Pentagon and congressional sources say many lawmakers already know about this plan. It was briefed recently on Capitol Hill, to Republicans and Democrats alike.

So, what sort of details did Armando conveniently leave out? Let’s see: a draw-down, not a withdrawal…Democrats and Republicans already know about it (hmmm…so, by Armando’s logic, since he equates this with Murtha’s plan, Murtha is merely grandstanding and playing politics with the troops – that’s not me talking, that’s the implication of Armando’s piece)…but most importantly: the plan calls for a draw-down under conditions of victory.

You see, Armando, even mean ol’ Republicans want the troops home. It’s just that some of us prefer to win the war first…