Eastasia/Eurasia

September was supposed to be the "benchmark" month. Without demonstrable progress in Iraq we were supposed to begin planning for withdrawal,--We are at war with Eurasia--the logic being that our presence in Iraq is making things worse for Iraqis. September comes and those benchmarks are clearly not met--We have always been at war with Eurasia--nevertheless, the Washington establishment decides to continue the war. Meanwhile tough talk continues on the possibly pending war in Iran--We are at war with Eastasia--despite the fact that our troops are woefully overtaxed in Iraq--We have always been at war with Eastasia--and will, if some neocon war cheerleaders have their way, be asked to endure even longer tours of duty with even shorter breaks. Who will fight the next war?--We are at war with Eurasia--and will the mounting death toll in Iraq (US casualties=3,780; other coalition casualties=298; Iraqi casualties=somewhere between 37,000 and over 100,000 ) be factored into any kind of balance sheet of pluses and minuses when considering another regime change fantasy?--We at war with Eastasia.Just so we're clear:US dead = 3,780Coalition dead = 298Iraqi dead = 37,000 - 100,000Newly functioning democracies = 0We have always been at war with Eastasia.From Frederick W. Kagan's Choosing Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq a publication of the American Enterprise Institute, a neo-con "think" tank."We must send more American combat forces into Iraq and especially into Baghdad to support this operation...""The ground forces must accept longer tours for several years. National Guard units will have to accept increased deployments during this period...""The president must issue a personal call for young Americans to volunteer to fight in the decisive conflict of this generation..."We have always been at war with Eurasia.