I'm in the "last throes" of my patience

Kevin Drum takes on Rumsfeld (and his defence of Cheney's inane assertion that the Iraqi insurgency is in its "last throes) at Political Animal -- see here. Needless to say, Drum is right:

These guys still can't face the reality of what's happened to their lovely little war. They willfully ignored the advice of the uniformed military officers who had actual experience in fighting modern wars, and because of that they didn't know what they were getting into before the war, they didn't know what they were up against after the war, and they're apparently still clueless about what to expect in the future. It's long past time for George Bush to either find someone who's serious about winning this war or else someone who's serious about getting out. Rumsfeld is neither.

As one who (reluctantly, given the irreversible build-up) supported the war before it began, largely based on Blairite humanitarianism and false (or politicized) intelligence, I cannot but agree*. Whether you supported this war or not, whether you support it today or not, whether you think the U.S. should pull out or double its efforts to see the job done, it is a fact, if I may be so blunt, that the handling of the occupation, which began back with the pre-war planning (or lack thereof, from what the British tell us), has been a disaster. How many more people will die as a consequence of such failure?

No, I don't have much patience left, if any, but the insurgency still has a long, long way to go -- perhaps 12 more years, according to Rumsfeld himself. (And whom do you trust more to speak the truth, Cheney or Abizaid? Exactly.)

* See a lengthier post on Iraq here, with an explanation of my shifting views from invasion to occupation.