Holy Joe supports the Big Surge

Lieberman, (who starts his article by invoking 9/11 just like Bush always does, even though 9/11 had nothing to do with the quagmire we voluntarily walked into, Joe):
"In Iraq today we have a responsibility to do what is strategically and morally right for our nation over the long term -- not what appears easier in the short term. The daily scenes of death and destruction are heartbreaking and infuriating. But there is no better strategic and moral alternative for America than standing with the moderate Iraqis until the country is stable and they can take over their security. Rather than engaging in hand-wringing, carping or calls for withdrawal, we must summon the vision, will and courage to take the difficult and decisive steps needed for success and, yes, victory in Iraq. That will greatly advance the cause of moderation and freedom throughout the Middle East and protect our security at home."

Ok, Joe. We send more troops like we did this last summer (which gained absolutely nothing, remember?) Then what? Go on aimless patrols? Stand around? Attack something, anything even if it inflames the factions? Which side? Here are some really simple Cliff Notes of the war: The Saudis who are our 'friends' are Sunni. The Iranians are Shia. We have indicated we don't like Sadr. But we need the Shia to support al-Maliki. So we throw in with Iran and piss off Saudi Arabia who indicates they will support the Sunni. Iran and Saudi Arabia are eyeing each other. You have an solution for this horrific tangle, Joe? What? (/grabs shirt collar and shakes) What is the plan?

And just a reminder....people who start wars usually have a plan BEFORE they start, you know.

Sinfonian says it better.