Time to bring the troops home

[kallend 2,182]

“We say with confidence that we are capable, God willing, of taking full responsibility for the security file if the international forces withdraw in any time they wish,” Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki, BAGHDAD, July 14 2007.

www.abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3378187

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[dorbie 0]

So you're basically agreeing "Mission Accomplished".

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

So you're basically agreeing "Mission Accomplished".

You are so forgetful. That was in May 2003. We just spent 4 additional years pissing away lives and money.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[dorbie 0]

Apparently not pissed away as evidenced by your OP.

You seem oblivious to the fact that this story if we accept it as true (which you seem to insist we do) spectacularly indicts your determined campaign during those 4 years.

[billvon 3,132]

> So you're basically agreeing "Mission Accomplished".

If war supporters want to claim "we won!" then fine. Personally I don't care what the rhetoric is, or whether one side "wins" or whatever. The important thing is to start following the ISG recommendations and start drawing down troop levels so we can start to get out of there.

When we finally do withdraw, Iraq is still going to be a violent place. The war supporters will claim victory, that they achieved 8 out of 9 objectives, that the civil war isn't all that bad, that the media is lying etc etc. The anti-war folks will point to the number of dead, the destruction of the country, the exodus of a big chunk of the population etc. Both sides can claim victory, so both sides will be happy. I'll be happy not because some political party scored a victory, but because thousands more US troops will not have to die.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

I'll be happy not because some political party scored a victory, but because thousands more US troops will not have to die.

I believe there will likely be war in the middle east, and will need to be involved in it, for many, many years to come. It will likely include Iran. The Islamofacists want you to believe that their violence against all that is western is due to some specific wrongs done to them in the past, but it is not. They will not stop their crusade until they achieve their goal.

Getting our troops out of Iraq will not stop the war against us. If we decide that Iraq isn't worthy of the effort to liberate them, then that is actually a conclusion I can understand. But the war against us will not stop, it will just move.

In order for war against the western world to stop, there will need to be Arab leaders like Anwar Sadat that will have a true change of heart. When that happens is not something the western world can decide. The only other possibility is to let them win, have a worldwide Islamic state - that is their stated objective.

The Islamofacists are the crusaders now, not us.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[shropshire 0]

>

That's what the PNAC (scum) want.

>

Putting the troops into Iraq is what caused (or at the very least, escalated it) the war against you, can't you see that?

The loss of countless thousands of lives and for what? The egos of a handfull of small minded people...... Well thank you very much for making all of our lifes poorer in oh so many ways and the wallets of their mates thicker via psuedo security initialives


> If it helps you sleep at night.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

>

That's what the PNAC (scum) want.

>

Putting the troops into Iraq is what caused (or at the very least, escalated it) the war against you, can't you see that?

The loss of countless thousands of lives and for what? The egos of a handfull of small minded people...... Well thank you very much for making all of our lifes poorer in oh so many ways and the wallets of their mates thicker via psuedo security initialives


> If it helps you sleep at night.

I understand that some think Islamofacists are the fault of the western world (it is what the Islamofacists want the western world to accept). Many do not. They want to impose their Islamic law on the rest of the world, it is their stated goal. Al Qaeda is now in Iraq, I think we should fight them wherever they are.

If you think the Islamofacists can be fought against and contained by other means, then I can agree - that is a debate worth having. If you think that appeasment will work, that the Islamofacists have some limited set of demands that can be accomodated, then we are worlds apart.

As I said before, I could entertain the idea that Iraq isn't capable of handling freedom and democracy - that they aren't worth liberating. That means we should have just ousted Hussein and left them to their own, perhaps to have another similar leader come to power and have to decide what to do at that time. I can see the possible logic in that, and I think that is exactly where we will be if we just pull our troops out as quickly as possible now. I do think that it was worth getting rid of Hussein, though.

Quote

> If it helps you sleep at night.

They have said explicitly to us - they want a world wide Islamic state and are willing to use violence to achieve that goal. If that isn't the same as the crusades, I don't know what is.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

“We say with confidence that we are capable, God willing, of taking full responsibility for the security file if the international forces withdraw in any time they wish,” Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki, BAGHDAD, July 14 2007.

Thanks for the reference to the news story.

Do you think he's right? I don't. I believe he can take responsibility, no doubt. But he would be taking responsibility for failure.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[shropshire 0]

Thanks for taking the time to answer.. It was well thought out.

Appeasement is not the way to go, IMHO but Islam is not the enemy per se, but criminal elements are (and dont ever forget, they exist in all segements of our little planet - even at home).

The more that 'we' condem a complete group of people (Islam in this instance) the more that we act as a a recruitment agency for the criminal groups. The more innocent kids that we kill, the more of their parents will be set against us... It's like a self for filling prophecy.

WE did nothing to help our situation by attacking a country that had little or nothing (at the time) to be gained from helping AQ. OUR focus was lost and can now not [easily] be regained.

I don't think that WE did right to get rid of SH. He was by no means the worse dictator on the planet and the method was also very wrong. killing kids is not the right way to oust a single dictator. The Iraq campaign was merley an act of gross ego and has caused way more harm than good.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Thanks for taking the time to answer.. It was well thought out.

Appeasement is not the way to go, IMHO but Islam is not the enemy per se, but criminal elements are (and dont ever forget, they exist in all segements of our little planet - even at home).

The more that 'we' condem a complete group of people (Islam in this instance) the more that we act as a a recruitment agency for the criminal groups. The more innocent kids that we kill, the more of their parents will be set against us... It's like a self for filling prophecy.

WE did nothing to help out situation by attacking a country that had little or nothing (at the time) to be gained from helping AQ. OUR focus was lost and can now not [easily] be regained.

Of course Islam is not the enemy, Islamofacism is.

I give Bush a lot of credit for having the guts to call it what it is. Some will say that abortion clinic bombers should then be called Christianfacists, and I agree, abortion clinic bombers are Christianfacists. The big difference is that such Christianfacists are aggressively pursued and prosecuted by the authorities. Much of the Islamic world turns a blind eye to the Islamofacists because they are sympathetic to their cause or because they are afraid of retribution.

To say we shouldn't declare war on Islamofacists because innocents will die is an argument in favor of pacifism as a policy. We didn't worry about the general population of Japan and Germany holding a grudge against us in WWII, why is it so different now, when the toll on the innocent civilian population is so much less?

I think the Islamofacists are an enemy that must be fought with violence, do you agree? Some think non-violent methods will work, that they can be contained, I do not.

The Germans and Japanese had a true change of heart at the end of the war. They realized their leader's imperialist goals had brought them to destruction. They just wanted to live peaceful lives without the vision of world conquest.

Where is the Arab world's next Anwar Sadat? We need a few copies of him to show his head and speak up.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[PLFXpert 0]

It's interesting & a bit tough.

I want our troops out, but gradually for the most part...

I happen to have family "on the inside"--i.e. top secret/can't tell us anything, but can tell us their opinion to a certain point and...

Well...

It's just tough.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[joedirt 0]

Quote

I believe there will likely be war in the middle east, and will need to be involved in it, for many, many years to come. It will likely include Iran. The Islamofacists want you to believe that their violence against all that is western is due to some specific wrongs done to them in the past, but it is not. They will not stop their crusade until they achieve their goal.

Getting our troops out of Iraq will not stop the war against us. If we decide that Iraq isn't worthy of the effort to liberate them, then that is actually a conclusion I can understand. But the war against us will not stop, it will just move.

In order for war against the western world to stop, there will need to be Arab leaders like Anwar Sadat that will have a true change of heart. When that happens is not something the western world can decide. The only other possibility is to let them win, have a worldwide Islamic state - that is their stated objective.

The Islamofacists are the crusaders now, not us.

Damn, I agree with your whole post. Muslims need to do what Christians started doing a few hundred years ago. They need to start toning it down before this really does turn into a clash of civilizations. It's tough when one side thinks it's fighting a religious war and the other doesn't.

[rushmc 23]

You have presented for us to read the most complete explination of what the US is defending itself against that I have seen to date. Well done and thank you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Muslims need to do what Christians started doing a few hundred years ago. They need to start toning it down before this really does turn into a clash of civilizations. It's tough when one side thinks it's fighting a religious war and the other doesn't.

the problem there is they(xtians) didnt do it willingly either... Society slowly secularized largely because the various monarchs got really tired of listening to the Pope/dealing with Religious challenges to their authority and through the slow 'osmosis ' of of science into the populace. Science that illustrated to a wider and wider audience that most of the "Truths" claimed as the 'sole providence of Religion' had little truth to them...

it will take just as long for the 'average' 3rd world tribal Islamist to come around, and they have active radicals working against it. Radicals who are well aware of the dangers of "Western Societies Demonic (Secular) Influences" will have on their ability to sway opinions and recruit suicide bombers and so do everything they can to prevent it. All the while using the modern methods they prohibit their general populace to maintain communications and control over their largely ignorant followers.

Open Warfare was not the way to solve this issue.. it has only gained them recruits, wasted american lives and created a power vacuum no western power will be able to 'fill' without continuing escalating violence, because they will always be seen as the "occupiers" but the general populace.....

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[misaltas 0]

Quote

Where is the Arab world's next Anwar Sadat?

I'm confident the Arab world's next Anwar Sadat is out there somewhere, but at this point silent, probably remembering quite well what happened to Anwar Sadat.

Ohne Liebe sind wir nichts

[joedirt 0]

Quote

it will take just as long for the 'average' 3rd world tribal Islamist to come around, and they have active radicals working against it.

Well they've had almost as long as Christianity, Muhammed was born only a few hundred or so years after Christ right? Have the Muslims had a renaissance or an enlightenment?

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

“We say with confidence that we are capable, God willing, of taking full responsibility for the security file if the international forces withdraw in any time they wish,” Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki, BAGHDAD, July 14 2007.

Thanks for the reference to the news story.

Do you think he's right? I don't. I believe he can take responsibility, no doubt. But he would be taking responsibility for failure.

Don't worry they are already saying his comments were misconstrued. Expect an imminent U-turn from kallend who will no longer wish to have the Iraqi leader determine our policy on the war.

I personally think we should wait until Gen. Patraeus reports before reconsidering the situation.

[shropshire 0]

>...

That generalisation is so last year.... You can NOT tar a set of diverse peoples eith the the same brush as the criminal few.

Mr & Mrs average Muslim has no more control over AQ than you or I do over GWB and his pack of rogues.

DOn't over simplify the situation... it isn't simple.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Guest]

Quote

>...

That generalisation is so last year.... You can NOT tar a set of diverse peoples eith the the same brush as the criminal few.

Mr & Mrs average Muslim has no more control over AQ than you or I do over GWB and his pack of rogues.

DOn't over simplify the situation... it isn't simple.

It is simple - it's a death cult. It's all it ever was, and all it ever will be.

mh
.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[shropshire 0]

So, when y'gonna start locking up all of the 'merican Muslims?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[normiss 906]

and here I thought we already do...

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

Quote

Quote

“We say with confidence that we are capable, God willing, of taking full responsibility for the security file if the international forces withdraw in any time they wish,” Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki, BAGHDAD, July 14 2007.

Thanks for the reference to the news story.

Do you think he's right? I don't. I believe he can take responsibility, no doubt. But he would be taking responsibility for failure.

Don't worry they are already saying his comments were misconstrued. Expect an imminent U-turn from kallend who will no longer wish to have the Iraqi leader determine our policy on the war.

I personally think we should wait until Gen. Patraeus reports before reconsidering the situation.

I think Bush should immediately implement the recommendations of the ISG.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

I think Bush should immediately implement the recommendations of the ISG.

Do you think it would work? I thought you would prefer to just get the troops back as soon as possible.

Do you think Maliki is correct in saying that they would be able to take care of things from now on?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[dorbie 0]

Quote

I think Bush should immediately implement the recommendations of the ISG.

I must have missed an election somewhere.

Congress has agreed to wait until September, unfortunately some want to move the goalposts again.