Michael Yon represents the best of the reporting going on about our troops in Iraq. If I had the power, I would put him in charge of running the war.

A general emailed in the past 24 hours threatening to kick me out. The first time the Army threatened to kick me out was in late 2005, just after I published a dispatch called “Gates of Fire.” Some of the senior level public affairs people who’d been upset by “Proximity Delays” were looking ever since for a reason to kick me out and they wanted to use “Gates of Fire” as a catapult. In the events described in that dispatch, I broke some rules by, for instance, firing a weapon during combat when some of our soldiers were fighting fairly close quarters and one was wounded and still under enemy fire. That’s right. I’m not sure what message the senior level public affairs people thought that would convey had they succeeded, (which they didn’t) but it was clear to me what they valued most. They want the press on a short leash, even at the expense of the life of a soldier.

Some readers might recall that LTC Barry Johnson denied my embed requests in 2006, but after I wrote “Censoring Iraq,” somehow the door opened up. Strangely, a couple days ago, LTC Barry Johnson invited me to be a panelist at a symposium in Washington D.C. on ”the role of blogs and bloggers in the news environment today. The intent is to help PAOs better understand the issues involved.” Call me suspicious, but my whiskers tingled on that one.

If you wonder why we are losing in Iraq, and we are, I can tell you the reason in one word: bureaucrats. Bureaucrats are killing our chances of winning more surely than any other single factor. They are a worse enemy than the insurgents. Want to do something that makes sense and would help us win? Submit your application through the proper channels and wait two years. By then, you’ll have rotated home and stopped caring. I’m not exaggerating.

Yon brings up the salient point that the U.S. military does a piss poor job of accommodating the press trying to report on the war. I know this first hand. We were too busy micromanaging our troops in my unit to really focus on the mission of taking care of reporters. And the politics of who got the embeds and why would make you sick were privy to them. I’ll go into details after I’m safely out of uniform, thanks. No need to expose myself to retribution now.

So anyway, Yon gets it, and the brass, as usual, don’t. Why in the hell are we selling big-screen TVs in our combat zone PX facilities?

But considering all the planning, organization, logistics and resources that went in to putting up what amounts to a food court in a surburban mall, how hard would it be, really, for there to be a clean, well-lit press trailer, open 24-7, with some desks, chairs and lockers, wired for the internet? Not on every base, but on enough of them so that stories from everywhere else could get out on a regular basis. For a military that is the first to gripe about not getting enough press–in a kind of war where the press can determine the outcome–it seems fairly obvious that the first step would be to at least make sure there is a place for the press to work. If this were a few months into this war, I could understand it, but to not even be at square one this far in?

Mike, keep killing the bureaucrats with your pen. I’m in your corner.

So 16 dogs and cats have died from what is now being called rat poison in their food supply.

So far, I haven’t heard anyone in the media speculating on this, but what if this whole pet food debacle is just a test. After all, wouldn’t it be just as easy to put rat poison into the human food supply chain? I wonder how many would die before that got stopped.

What if someone is planning on putting something much worse than rat poison into your next Big Mac? No worries, Homeland Security’s best crack agents are on the job.

Never trust a talking turd or a Congressperson. They are essentially one in the same 98.9% of the time.

While the premise “The readiness challenges facing the US military today are immense,” and much of the content of How to fuel up the out-of-gas US military machine is valid, the whole article becomes bullshit when Democrat Neil Abercrombie concludes:

President Bush has used Congress as a money spigot, funding military operations through a series of emergency budget requests with no oversight. The government has spent money it didn’t have and paid for it with deficit spending – essentially raising taxes on America’s children.

That’s about to change.

We’re committed to funding major recurring war costs through the regular budget process, while ensuring that real emergencies, real unforeseen expenses, and real battlefield needs are funded quickly. With Democrats in power, the American people can expect requests by the Pentagon and administration for “emergency” supplemental funds to be scrutinized much more closely.

We understand that wars always give rise to unforeseen circumstances and unexpected needs. However, there will be no more blank checks for Defense spending unrelated to battlefield needs. Everything must be prioritized so Congress can make the most informed choices.

Give me a break. Democratic senators and representatives lie, cheat and steal just as well as Republican ones, if not better.

Do I think we’re breaking the U.S. military? Yes, I do. I won’t be re-enlisting when my current contract is up. I am very worried about where the nation will be ten years from now when it comes to an all volunteer professional fighting force. And when a Democrat has the audacity to claim his party is the solution to the problem at the very same time his fellows are adding nonsense non-military pork spending, I’m tempted to punch him in the mouth and spit in his eye.

From my day to day perspective, Congress is vying for the title of America’s Wost Enemy right alongside jihadis. In the meantime, our military is slowly grinding itself to pieces as bureaucrats lead from behind. Sure, we have lots of heroes to throw at this problem. For every hero I see, there seem to be three or four cravens either whining, pointing fingers, misdirecting, spinning, stealing, or coming up with reasons why it’s actually us who are the terrorists.

And so, we come to this great crossroads of American history. The second half of my life should be very interesting. Today, the talk is often of civil war in Iraq. It could just as easily happen here. Baghdad and Washington, D.C. are not that far apart in a shrinking world.

Remember that you voted for these people. While they fuss and fight in our Capitol (when they can be bothered to show up) a very large machine is quietly destroying itself. When this machine that protects you from yourself and others finally implodes, the world you know will change forever. It will be reshaped in a new image that few of you can imagine.

We still have time to fix things.

When it comes to Iraq, I’m usually highly dubious of the messages I hear from the Bush administration. While I agree, in principle, with the ideas that we should fight terrorism at the source and that human beings in the Middle East want to determine their own paths in life as much as I do, George W. Bush is a terrible, horrible marketer. The messages about Iraq are so muddled, on both sides, that one comes away from most media articles about this war feeling confused or hopeless.
Having spent a year there, I tend to look to non-governmental sources when I want to answer the question: are we making progress in Iraq?

I’ve been fairly dubious that the troop surge is going to be enough to change the situation on the ground short term. But this seems like a glimmer of hope to me:

There’s also the month-old and continuing Baghdad security operation, and the apparent determination of PM Maliki to confront and disarm all outlaws — especially those with connections with neighboring countries. In addition, the flight of Sadr and many others from Iraq has also dealt a blow to Iran’s influence in Iraq.

I’m almost certain Maliki’s statement during the conference last Saturday caused disappointment in Tehran. For the first time the head of state didn’t use double standards in addressing Iraq’s neighbors. Iran was addressed in the same tone that Suuni neighbors were addressed. This by the very Shia premier Iran was hoping to make its puppet.

Ultimately, only Iraqis can decide that Iraq will be a place of peace. Perhaps they are finally growing weary of the bloodshed.

Minimizing Iranian government meddling in Iraq’s affairs is one step towards stability.

When the President initially announced his 20,000-strong “troop surge” to Baghdad and al-Anbar, I said I thought 200,000 would be a more realistic number but that we didn’t have that many fighters available. We may not have 200,000 additional troops ready to fight in Iraq, but that hasn’t stopped commanders there from asking for what they think they can get:

The commander of U.S. forces in Iraq has asked for an additional 2,500 to 3,000 troops to be sent to Iraq as part of the Bush administration’s military buildup to crack down on rising sectarian violence and insurgents, The Boston Globe reported.

Too bad previous leaders didn’t demand more human resources a long time ago.

It may take ten years and 10,000 more American lives to stabilize Iraq, but I dread the alternative.

Americans of African descent often forget just how easy they have it. Just ask someone who is actually an African. That continent is the forgotten place, mostly ignored most of the time by most people who don’t happen to be in Africa.

It’s also the world’s biggest humanitarian tragedy, and has been much longer than I have been alive.

“The attackers came to our home. They hit my husband and my son - I cried a lot and one of them rushed at me and tore my skirt. They raped me in front of my husband and children,” said Benedicte, who was raped by rebels in Bouake in 2002.

The report alleges that those responsible include the New Forces rebels, the militias who support President Laurent Gbagbo, and members of the security forces who are loyal to President Gbagbo.

Count your blessings, Americans.