Iraq Coup? Never Mind.

I can only keep asking. Does anybody really believe that it is possible to have free elections, with no US meddling with acceptable candidate list, no US occupation, and a friendly Iraqi government?
.
And does anyone really believe that the US is going to leave Iraq with no national defense capability, no air, no armor, no logistical capability?
.
It's good to see Joe tiptoeing towards addressing these questions. But they do have to be addressed, reasonably forthrightly. I just got my copy of Foreign Affairs. Perhaps the articles on middle east peace making discuss these two questions.

I recall asking for confirmation that the Three Cabelleros were in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan (where one did a short JAG stint as part of his service) and Iraq. Meanwhile back at home the rest of the Senate was grappling with the bailout. Amazing that the Three Fiddlers were not in the Senate to do important business as elected officials. Obama needs to keep an eye on the Three Freelancers.

It's nice to see the Three Amigos come around. That's hopeful that now, with Bush almost out the door and it is safe to say, they have the stones to talk about ending this ill-conceived nightmare. Pardon my bitter cynicism.
.
Just a couple of quibbles. One, there's not really a bright line, it appears, between "fan" and "fetishist." I always thought that the media infatuation with Petraeus was pretty silly, and based upon the silent prayer that he might save them some face for their extreme miscalculation in their outright advocacy and cheerleading for Bush's War. But whatever.
.
Also, I'm not too sure about that "a constant succession of coups and attempted coups." From 1968 to 2003 Iraq had two presidents. One resigned and the other was taken out in an American "regime change" and not a coup. True, there were some troubles in the 1960's. Before that, Iraq had kings. like three of them since 1850 or so. I don't see the "constant succession of coups" though I'm less sure that there were no constant succession of attempted coups. Wikipedia doesn't say.
.
But other than that.....

Note that the op-ed presumes a permanent presence, while not saying so in so many words.
.
The continued complete failure of our elected officials and our media to make it clear that a permanent occupation, which will be very unpopular with both Iraqis and Americans, is still the plan.

Sorry that last wasn't a sentence. This failure to state clearly the plans for continued occupation is execrable.

Good to see Joe Lieberman, after haven been given a lifeline from BHO, is sticking with his heart and penning "advice" with the defeated republican candidate and the candidate's long time companion.
I am hopeful that the president-elect will give it all the consideration it deserves.

I realize this is not germane to the post above, but it is interesting.

According to CNBC Madoff has been put under 24 hour detention in his Manhattan apartment to "prevent harm or flight." My bet harm! He has screwed many wealthy people including many foreign types and perhaps a few criminal types. I am sure the Feds have gotten wind of perhaps a few threats directed his way. At this point I would call him "dead man walking." I have a feeling the Feds will protect him until they can get all the information they need about where the money went. Then they will probably throw him to the wolves, either inside or outside the prison system.

I wonder if Vegas has yet started a betting pool on his lifespan?

Atrios had his trademark pithy take, adding to @bitterpill's post above.
.
I like this:
"This Washington fetishization of everyone agreeing with each other is just weird. People disagree about stuff. I'd think people in politics would understand that."

Meh. Bad link. Try this.
Eschaton

newfloridian-they probably are making sure he doesn't "die" like Ken Lay.

Joe,
.
As a DC insider, do you have any thoughts on Ruth Marcus today?
.
"Yet I'm coming to the conclusion that what's most crucial here is ensuring that these mistakes are not repeated. In the end, that may be more important than punishing those who acted wrongly in pursuit of what they thought was right."
Ruth Marcus - Mark Felt and the Dilemma of Rights vs. Security - washingtonpost.com

Joe,
.
Reading your post, I was curious as to how an "attempted coup" could possibly be seen as a "glass half full". Then I read this paragraph in the NYT:
.
Among those who had been under investigation, Mr. Bolani said, were an official who has been in the hospital awaiting surgery, a man who has already been in prison for months and a man who works in the archives department of the Interior Ministry taking care of files. Many of them, including one of the generals detained, worked in the traffic directorate.
.
The *traffic directorate* attempting a coup? Sounds like the glass was just missing a few drips...

But Joe:
-
Aren't you worried that Obama might be labeled "unpatriotic" or "anti-military" by his rightist partisan enemies, if he were to show insufficient deference to Commanders In The Field, especially the unquestionable hero General Petraeus? Would it not be seized upon by Rush Limbaugh and Republicans in Congress, and used to paint the Democrats as "still stumbling on national security"?
_
Has something changed?

""Yet I'm coming to the conclusion that what's most crucial here is ensuring that these mistakes are not repeated. In the end, that may be more important than punishing those who acted wrongly in pursuit of what they thought was right.
.
Yep those are the two choices, no way can we do both. (rolls eyes)

PNNTO
.
Joe Lieberman et al are just making it too easy to label them the "three stooges"
.
Moe=McCain
Curly=Lieberman
Larry=Graham
.
But who the hell is Shemp?

Deep Thought
.

It will be interesting what we do 6 to 10 years from now when Maliki or his sucessor turns into Saddam lite.

@ James: the folks in the Bush admin are going to plead the Ruth Marcus defence: "We thought we were doing the right thing?" The next time a bank robber gets his swag he can also claim this defence, since banks are reluctant to "lend" money.

Don't know SG, I hate to leave out the House, Boehner?

Iraq can serve as an anchor of stability in the region, a counter to Iranian hegemony and a model of democracy for the Middle East.
.
How f--king stupid are these people?
Let's pretend Ayatollah Khamenei has been eating rotisserie chicken for the past five years. His greasy finger prints would be all over Baghdad. Training Special Groups is just the beginning of it. There are dozens of stories of Maliki cozying up to Iran.
.
And yet the Three Chumps, for some reason, continue to insist that the two predominantly Shiite powers in a sea of Sunni nations are going to end up enemies?
.
What did they do while they were over there? Play Sudoku?
.
When are we, as a nation, allowed to tell them to shut the f--k up and go play Nintendo Wii or something?

Cliff: the enduring myth is that we can drive a wedge between the Iranians and the Shias in Iraq. It is fed by a small group of Iranians of the former Imperial regime in exile here in the US. The late Shah's son is the emperor in exile. They are in close touch with some Village dwellers.

"Iraq can serve as an anchor of stability in the region, a counter to Iranian hegemony and a model of democracy for the Middle East."
.
Come on, folks, put on your thinking caps. Iraq is not really the focus of this op ed. Oh sure, they are pretending like that's what they care about. Nicely done! Yay for consensus and magic ponies. Sure. I agree with Atrios' drollery, but that's just a mask for what's really going on here. These three idiots care about only one of the three things mentioned in that sentence I cribbed above. Iran. It's Iran, stupid. Iran only is what this little game of advice for the new president is all about. These a$$rockets are all obsessed with Iran: and what happens in Iraq, to them, is only important vis a vis the United States taking a more belligerent stance towards Iran over the next several years. That's all they want here. They don't give two $hits for the Iranians, except how they may be used as pawns. Remember and never forget, for the foreign policy neo-cons, Iraq was supposed their stepping stone into Iran. They're just giving a quarter inch in order to take a mile.
.
I think they're too late and the game rules have changed way too much since 2003 to get what they want. But I guess we'll see about that. It's gonna really #ucking ugly.

Oops, meant to say they don't give two $hits for the Iraqis. My bad.

sevenoaks: Congratulations, you just made my head explode with the stupidity of it all.
.
So, at the behest of the son of a leader who has been out of power for thirty years (Emperor in Exile? What the hell year is this, 1803?) the B*tch Squad here travels through the Middle east and manages to conclude that Iraq and Iran will not be BFF.
.
I have a hunch that this will be the stupidest thing I encounter all day.

.
Ah. Cliff asks the overriding, most cogent question, succinctly.
.

Yow. I tend to respect anything Robert Baer puts out, and his latest article is not exactly complimentary of Obama's nomination of Dennis Blair.