It is reported that Bush is going to replace the top Generals in Iraq. This sounds like a whole new set of convienent Fall guys. This along with the new "CANNON FODDER" surge of troops should give him the time and new people to Blame for his failures. Bringing us right up to the 2008 elections. Then it's somebody else's problem. Sound pretty scripted to me.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070105/..._pr_wh/us_iraq

should cement Bush's legacy as our worst president ever.

__________________
the memories of a man in his old age
are the deeds of a man in his prime

roger waters

But we've already won the war, right? So why change anything? Odd indeed.

__________________
Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?

analysis concerning the changing of the guard and the "surge" strategy:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010407E.shtml

Are Bush and Cheney planning a manly Kagan style "long and large" surge or are their machinations even more Machiavellian? Are they planning a surge of short duration for the purpose of appearing manly, knowing full well that it will accomplish nothing other than saving face before finally making the surge out of Iraq prior to Nov. 2008? I see that W. Kristol has lined up behind the Kagan surge strategy. Why exactly would anyone expect the NeoCons to get anything right at this point?