our plan for victory

(P) It's pretty clear. Expropriate natural resources for the benefit of large corporations.

And honestly, this might be necessary; if we're really in a military fight against extremism and our key resources can only be entrusted to Fortune 100 companies, then by all means we should be using our unparalleled, taxpayer-financed military supremacy in Risk-like fashion to occupy strategically important parts of the world and turn them over to the Western world's largest companies. To paraphrase one of my favorite naval quotes (and apologies to my otherwise PG rating), damn the financial and human costs, full speed ahead! If the mission is clear and important, you don't half-ass it, and you accept the loss of a ship along the way.

But that doesn't happen, in our country, by imperial decree. The occupant of the Office of the President is sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. That does not grant kingly powers of war; rather, it requires input from legislators, the courts, and, indirectly, the general populace. in other words, a democratic process premised upon accountability and transparency. In the case of Iraq, either one supports self-determination and free markets, or one doesn't. There are good arguments both for and against. But when the President, the VP, and their advisors say they support these goals but spend their time acting to the contrary, then they forfeit their authority and legitimacy as the head of our nation and should be held accountable for the tremendous costs which they have inflicted upon us.