Extra attention to a few Centrist blogs:
Amba on the meaning of the word ‘surge’. Sadly, for Amba at least, U.S. President George W. Bush will not use the word ‘surge’ but instead an ‘increase of troops’. Dang.
David Adesnik favors a ‘surge’. He tries to explain why. After reading his post, I’m still wondering why he supports it. After reading David’s post, go read QandO: Surge Math. It’s a good read
Tom in Texas at Balloon Juice: a friend of Tom recently joined the army and, then, “asked to be assigned to the front lines” (Iraq). Instead, they “designated him a medic” because he was convicted on “DWI charges a few years ago”. Tom is “encouraged by this”, others – in the comment section – disagree.
Your thoughts?
Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings on the treatment of Jose Padilla. If completely accurate, way over the line and, to put it more strongly, simply horrible..
Brad DeLong: 20 000 extra troops? Whatever happened to the 50 000 as proposed by the 3K’s (Keane, Kagan and Kristol)? And… 20 000, a surge or wave?
Mathew at Centerfield on Romney, Lieberman-McCain and Giuliani: a 2008 Update.
Dick Polman on Bush’s credibility problem regarding Iraq.
Ron Beasley on the law designed to “privatize Iraq’s vast oil resources”.
And that was your Center of Attention for today, Wednesday January the 10th, 2007.
PAST CONTRIBUTOR.