You're the one who brought up impeachment as a solution. The inference was obvious.

I brought it up because nothing this adminsistration has done in Iraq has brought about any stated objective, and I see all their proposals as further inflaming the situation and making even the solution of 'just keep the lid on the powder keg' less and less likely (IE, attacking Iran and making the Iranian hard line even more entrenched)

Name ONE strategic objective aside from the fall of Baghdad that has been decisively achieved by this civilian leadership?

I'm sick and tired myself of idiots who think history began in 2001.

Oh, thats just rich. How many times have I heard the justification for the Iraq war our our prosecution of that war phrased as: '9/11/2001 changed everything'. I've heard that rhetoric from Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush, and in the lead up to this war- from you. Many many times.

Beyond that, my argument and concerns arise from a broad historical, political and sectarian analysis of the region- The same reason I predicted Iraq would become our own 'West Bank filled with insurgent bombing and street snipers' THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO. What has your subtle historical analysis brought us? Hmm? An intractable war in Iraq and a rapidly deteriorating political and miltary situation!? Please, do tell more of your analysies. I really can't wait to hear them.

In the middle east, 9/11/2001 only changed our handling of the middle east from piss-poor to disasterous. Fire to the powder.

The Middle East has been a zoo for many years

Granted, but how does that alter the situation we are facing now? The Saudis already said that they will be getting involved if they see open genocide on the streets of Iraq. Its in SA's vested interest to block Iran from the remnants of the Iraqi State. Its in Irans vested self interest to co-opt whats left of southern Iraq. They are all well armed, they all have money, and they are all fueled by extremism- and we just did the equivalent of throwing the ribeye steak into the pack of hungry dogs- The entire state of Iraq.

Relax. Iran and Saudi Arabia aren't going to go to war.

Oh, predictions from you just leave me so reassured. Again: White Noise Generator. Sorry, but given your track record I'll seek reassuring analysis from other sources.

Most of what you are "predicting" isn't going to happen. If the Middle East didn't descend into permanent chaos during the Iran-Iraq War, or Desert Storm, why should it happen now? Even assuming Iraq goes to hell?

By the same argument- If Europe didn't descend into chaos during [insert late 19th century/early 20th century military campaign in europe], why would it descend into chaos of WWI?

Because axies of power are shifting. Iran is more of a regional power than ever before, Saudi Arabia sees its interests threatened, because Islamic Extremism and Sunni/Shia conflict is escalating all over the region, because Iran/Iraq was a stalemate between two powers that would never see their objectives realized, while this situation is played out between 3-or-4 regional powers, two of which already are partially if not entirely engaged. Because Israel is ready to throw gasoline on the regional fire by bombing the living hell out of Iranian nuclear and military facilities. Because Iran is demonstrating the capacity and will to develop a nuclear bomb. Because its Different in every way from your historical examples.

The argument that 'well, it didn't happen before, so it ain't gonna happen' is a handwave- a non-argument. History often repeats itself, but it also often doesn't- thats while we're not rubbing sticks together on the plains of africa. And beyond that, when history does repeat itself, there is a lot of history to choose from (IE, WWI and not the Iran+Iraq war).

Yeti