That definition of insanity

You know the famous definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That's what President Bush is doing with regard to Iraq. An article from the Toronto Sun called "Lynching Won't Help U.S." goes into it:

Senior American generals charged with Iraq, including Gen. John Abazaid and Gen. George Casey, have openly disagreed with Bush's plans for a "surge" in U.S. troop deployment. These able officers told the media they didn't need more troops. They warned additional U.S. troops would deter Iraq's Shia regime from developing its own security forces and keep it dependant on the U.S.

These statements were a shocker. Generals are not supposed to publicly disagree with their commander-in-chief. Gen. Casey is expected to be fired soon and replaced by a yes man. Gen. Abazaid is retiring early, in disgust, say friends.
...
Many U.S. senior military officers privately say it is small wonder Bush, who styles himself the "war president," is so deficient in military experience and knowledge. A few months in the Texas Air National Guard evading wartime draft certainly did not prepare him to wage two wars. Good, responsible presidents know when to listen to their generals, and when to retreat from stalemated or lost wars. If Bush does send thousands more troops to Iraq, he will be risking more American lives in a desperate, 11th-hour political gamble to show voters he has a new plan to resolve the horrible mess in Iraq he created.

Twenty or thirty thousand more U.S. troops thrown into the cauldron of Iraq will make little military difference. One hundred fifty thousand or more might, but the U.S. has run out of soldiers.

If Bush pours more troops into this -- a lost war -- he will fall into the trap of many bad gamblers who double up their bets in a reckless effort to recoup previous losses.

I don't see this ending any way but badly.