Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years

[rodeodance]

Source: wpost




August 12, 2007
Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/us/politics/12dems.html?hp
By JEFF ZELENY And MARC SANTORA

DES MOINES, Aug. 11 — Even as they call for an end to the war and pledge to bring the troops home, the Democratic presidential candidates are setting out positions that could leave the United States engaged in Iraq for years.

John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator, would keep troops in the region to intervene in an Iraqi genocide and be prepared for military action if violence spills into other countries. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York would leave residual forces to fight terrorism and to stabilize the Kurdish region in the north. And Senator Barack Obama of Illinois would leave a military presence of as-yet unspecified size in Iraq to provide security for American personnel, fight terrorism and train Iraqis.

These positions and those of some rivals suggest that the Democratic bumper-sticker message of a quick end to the conflict — however much it appeals to primary voters — oversimplifies the problems likely to be inherited by the next commander in chief. Antiwar advocates have raised little challenge to such positions by Democrats.

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico stands apart, having suggested that he would even leave some military equipment behind to expedite the troop withdrawal. In a forum at a gathering of bloggers last week, he declared: “I have a one-point plan to get out of Iraq: Get out! Get out!”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/us/politics/12dems.html?hp

[IndianaGreen]

1. If you want peace, vote for Kucinich!

All the others will keep an imperial footprint in Iraq, as Hillary said recently, to protect the oil and Israel.

[saigon68]

46. H. Clinton and VP Joementum will Bring "Peace in our Time"

They will get certain interests located to the west of iraq-nam to help them kill large numbers of terraists

[KansDem]

48. Damn! You just gave me a flashback!

Peace in our Time

How long will it be until we hear "Peace with Honor?"

[saigon68]

49. Neville Chamberlain

http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/ralph/workbook/ralprs36.htm

[KansDem]

53. I remember that now...the news footage of Chamberlain getting off the plane...

...after his visit with Hitler with a piece of paper in his hand--"Peace in our time."

Thanks for the refresher!

[MannyGoldstein]

2. This Is Going To Be A Horrible Fucking Mess

As we draw down, we become more vulnerable.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

4. Perhaps not with the deadenders being in their last throes and all,

it just might work out alright. (sarcasm off)

[angrycarpenter]

3. dont freak out

But I fear they may be right about staying there. Things may start to look better after bush is gone. Right now most of Iraq sees Bush as the enemy and if the next president begins anew with A policy based on compassion rather than greed we may have more success especially if we impeach B+C.

I know many say we should just leave but I am A firm believer in cleaning up the mess you make. We could blame everything on bush and pull out and maybe we could live with ourselves but the world would see that for what it is, A national cop-out.

For everyone sharpening their wit for A scathing reply understand, we all as A nation share in this terrible blunder as as much as I would like to bring every last solider home my sense of compassion cannot get behind running out on these people who were attacked without provocation.

[pretty_lies]

7. "Things may start to look better after bush is gone."

No, they won't.

Like Vietnam, the Democrats bought this dog a long time ago.

Maybe when Hillary escalates the war in 2009 you'll be there defending her. I hope most people will have more integrity.

The intentions of the US are fundamentally against the interests of Iraqis. They are to secure Israel's interests and to seize oil supplies, although historians will be arguing about this for many years to come.

But understand this: even if we were there with good intent, some messes can't be put right. Not even with all the good will in the world.

We will be forced to leave in the end, by bombs, bullets and jeering crowds. And both parties will own it.

[angrycarpenter]

12. wow what cynicism

Just because there are are no easy solutions does not mean we should not make the attempt to make things better.

As to my integrity I do not now or will I in the future support Hillary her giant flip-flop on national healthcare turned me against her.

If no one has any compassion for the Iraqi people we all have A serious problem that goes beyond any occupation.

I do not support the war in Iraq but to leave without trying to do something is too much like abandoning them to the corporate monsters trying to take them over now.

[timtom]

23. News Flash....

The corporate monsters have ALREADY taken them over now.

Kucinich says we need to get out of there NOW and immediately get an international peace-keeping force in there to help stabilize the utter chaos which now prevails.

[rodeodance]

28. and what international force would that be?---I think NATO has few troops

to go around at this time.

[timtom]

32. How about a UN peacekeeping force?

Why would NATO be involved in the ME?

[Psephos]

33. UN already pulled out four years ago

The chance that a UN peacekeeping force large enough to do the job will ever be dispatched is essentially zero. The only countries interested in sending troops to Iraq are those who wish to corner its oil and remake its government, and that will not be done under UN resolution.

[timtom]

34. Perhaps this is a bit more timely

http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=2700

Remember, the U.S. has had a major stick up its ass under the current misadministration.

Most likely, under...oh, say Kucinich, for example...things might be different.

Four years ago doesn't really bear on tomorrow.

[Psephos]

36. Nathan, no offense, but that UN statement you cited is all breath and no boots

The UN is well-practiced at making earnest statements, but not very good at making earnest military commitments.

Read the last sentence of the statement you cited again. Translation: no one from the UN is going to do anything there until the country is secure. That's going to be a long, long time from now.

No peacekeeping troops will be committed because the UN has no peacekeeping troops of its own except those volunteered from member nations' militaries. No country is going to expose its own troops to an unstable and deadly military/political mess, under the direction of someone else's generals (who feel pressure from their own political agendas), to keep two flavors of Muslims from killing each other. It's a total lose-lose situation, and no politician who values his/her job is going to walk the plank for Iraq.

Countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, China, and others have compelling geopolitical interests in Iraq. They can be counted on to manipulate the UN as usual for private gain, especially after US withdrawal. The departure of the US will create vicious competition among these states to gain control, and likely will engender more war. Although our soldiers will be out of it, violence and misery will continue as usual.

In the UN, each member nation sweet-talks platitudes about peace and cooperation while simultaneously jockeying for selfish gain and sub rosa power. It's inherent in the structure of the UN, which was poorly designed, as was the equally useless League of Nations in preventing World War II.

I wish it were different but one need only look at Kosovo or Congo or Rwanda for a good sense of what the UN actually stands for and is capable of these days.

I hear you about Kucinich (and what an upgrade he would be from Bushco) but nothing Dennis can say or do is going to change the inherent weakness of the UN nor the selfishness of powerful countries. Nothing he does is going to change all those billions of barrels of Iraqi oil into sand either. It will call out to the thirsty in the night, and then the soldiers will come.

[Speaker]

52. There is an easy solution.

Just because there are are no easy solutions does not mean we should not make the attempt to make things better.

Stop killing Iraqis. It pisses them off. Rightfully so.

The way to stop a war is to stop shooting people, and take our troops out of their cities.

Yes, there will be a lot of dieing, just like there was in the killing fields.

We cannot avoid that, we made it inevitable when we invaded. The only thing we can control is what year will the dieing commence. It is as inevitable as gravity. We signed a million death warrants when we let "little boots" open his money laundering operation in Iraq. How much money, and how many dead soldiers will we pledge to delay the slaughter for a few years?

[badgervan]

15. Nope

This fubar in Iraq is bush's war - every single bit of it.

[arewenotdemo]

17. I agree with every point save one. The proposition of American "good intent".

America is guilty of intentionally unleashing genocide upon the Iraqi people.

All arguments for a continued American occupation of, or presence in Iraq are utterly bogus.

[angrycarpenter]

18. you're right

fuck-em all. I didn't understand until now thank you.

[arewenotdemo]

19. You trust America to do the right thing?

Cause I sure as hell don't.

[tularetom]

8. We went in and fucked up their country now we're gonna just leave

the clusterfuck we caused. They didn't ask us there we just went. I agree we owe Iraq something but I don't know if the presence of American troops for a generation is the best idea. They will be a lightning rod for everything that's wrong there and that will be plenty. Maybe some sort of reparations, maybe ensuring that oil revenues are devoted to rebuilding the country rather than being diverted into the coffers of big American oil companies, but sure as hell not constructing a big giant embassy for every disgruntled Iraqi (which probably means all of em) to try to sabotage.

[creeksneakers2]

10. One should look at

what a decision to quickly and completely withdraw would leave. How popular would that decision be if there's a catastrophe?

Lives are more important than politics. Still, it really angers me that if we pull out of Iraq, Republicans will claim forever that we were just about to win when the Democrats pulled the plug. That's what the righties said about Vietnam. Eventually, they were able to convince enough people that Vietnam could have been won that the righties got away with starting another Vietnam.

We need a planned, definite outcome. Leaving behind some troops to deal with genocide or regional war makes sense. Those troops don't have to be involved in Iraq's civil war. They don't have to bother with Al Qaeda because Al Qaeda barely exists and won't be a problem. The troops could just pull back to the Kurdish North, and most of them could come home.

If things go well for a short prespecified time, then bring everybody home for good.

[Amonester]

57. There *already* is (and *has been*) a catastrophe (or many)

*catastrophes* and leaving behind some troops to deal with (the ongoing, and upcoming) genocide will never change that fact.

That leaves two options open:

1. Leave some troops behind and keep the neocon's number ( at http://icasualties.org/oif/ ) going up endlessly, while the easily predictable *ongoing and upcoming catastrophes* happen and will happen.

2. Leave no troops behind and stop the neocon's number ( at the same site ) FROM going up endlessly, while the easily predictable *ongoing and upcoming catastrophes* happen and will happen.

Besides... chosing option #1 when the country is going bankrupt ( at http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ ) obviously is NOT an option... thanks to the criminal cabal for greed. (NOT!)

[angrycarpenter]

27. is it wrong to have A little faith

That America is not totally over run by evil.

That we as A people are still capable of doing the right thing.

I cannot bring myself to be 100% cynical all the time. If I am fooling myself that there are still decent people at the higher levels of government then so be it. I love America and the thought that we as A country would just walk away from these people that we have done so, so wrong is just as horrible as invading them in the first place. If there is A UN peace keeping force, great! It will be America that brings them there and will continue to make up A large fraction of it. In one form or another America will be in Iraq for A long time, get used to it.

We will not just pull out no matter who wins the elections. I know I hate it too. Our whole strategy so far has been "subdue and exploit". A strong, compassionate leader can turn things around there by putting the state dept. in the lead of Iraq policy rather than the pentagon. Also A complete review of pentagon projects concerning Iraq will turn up some of the worst exploiters. All I am saying is that we will be there as rebuilders or destroyers there are no other choices. A political solution may still be possible with the right people in charge and the selfish people who started this mess punished harshly in full view of the world.

[NotGivingUp]

30. Forget the word 'FAITH'. It's a bad word. Thinking people use their reasoning power, NOT FAITH. n/t

[angrycarpenter]

31. did you read the whole thing or just the title

[Zhade]

39. When I see the Democratic leadership holding these criminals accountable, maybe not.

Until then, there is little reason to think things will improve.

[Zhade]

38. BULLSHIT. I don't own this - I wasn't the one who lied us into an illegal war.

Our presence is why people are dying.

We must leave - or we will be driven out.

[angrycarpenter]

41. well excuse me

For showing A little optimism. I based my opinion on what will almost certainly actually happen in the future and the best way to act rather than on my worst fears and anger at the war. Maybe I am just not liberal enough for this place.

[Speaker]

56. BULLSHIT. I don't own this...

'Zackly. I was against this misadventure from before it even started. It ain't mine.

I got ridiculed for years over it. "Is it a quagmire yet!!!!! *har har har*"

Well, guess what; It's a quagmire. The dorks can't win, and they can't get out.

I still remember Sean Hannity constantly screeching "But what if you're wrong!!! What if you're wrong!!!!"

Well, Eddy Munster, it looks like you were wrong. You murdered a million people; they just haven't been killed yet.

You're right, Zhade, this ain't ours.

[PDJane]

5. Get out is right.

The military action in Iraq is a war crime, and has been made more so by the use of DU and chemical weapons. The radioactivity in portions of Iraq is worse than the ground at Hirsoshima and Minimata.

Get out, be prepared for the butcher's bill. Forget about the oil, it's not your resource, and you're burning petrochemicals by the thousands of barrels to try to secure it.

[Xenotime]

44. We need to get out NOW!!! NOW NOW NOW

[msongs]

6. dems should start calling for an international conference on Iraq as a step

towards troop withdrawal.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[rodeodance]

29. no fear-----Condi is doing that now.

yugga yugga

[Demeter]

9. If There Was Any Good That Could Come Of It, I'd Say Stay. But There Isn't.

And these wannabes are deluding themselves if they think that the USA can fix anything anymore.

The best that the world could hope for is that the US forces come home, the "contractors" are tried for their war crimes and jailed, the other foreign interlopers are deported, and the country is split among the affinity groups.

Bring our people home, start cleaning up at home, get the Constitution repaired and strengthened, prosecute the criminals and hospitalize the mentally ill. Then maybe the US can show its face again.

[Up2Late]

11. NO! REALLY!?!? Ya Don't Say!?!

In other words, No Sh*t Sherlock.:banghead: :argh:

Unless the Pentagon has a secret Mother-ship hovering above the Earth which has the ability to lock onto and beam the troops out (like they did on Star Trek) they are going to have to pack up most of that gear that took them 4 years to get there and haul it and themselves out of there through several different WAR ZONES!

It ain't gonna be quick or easy. They should just withdraw to the Oil Fields like they (Bush Corp.) always wanted, that's all they ever cared about anyway.

[defendandprotect]

13. Bush is bankrupting the Treasury and our nation: GOP Third World America -- !!!!

The public has to figure this out soon . . . don't they?

No national medical care; Education under attack; unemployment insurance barely there any more;
jobs disappearing; bridges falling; infrastructure explosions causing major calamities;
economic investments turned into mere speculation; citizens responsible for corporate bail-outs;
citizens abanadoned and left to capitalistic crimes.

Collapsing stock markets -- threats by Cheney to attack Iran --

Certainly takes your mind off of fighting for national health care and subpeoonas, doesn't it -- ???

[davhill]

14. Get Rid of Bush 1st

Then start pressuring his successor to bring home the troops.

[Patchuli]

16. But you know what that leaves us, right?

Get rid of Darth first...

[Jim Warren]

20. Gonna take awhile

to get that oil out.

[trashcanistanista]

Then we need new

82wdemocrats.

[trashcanistanista]

21. Then we need new

democrats.

[timtom]

22. GODAMIGHTY!

What a dipshit of a writer that Marc Santora is. How obvious it is that he omitted Kucinich from his little diatribe.

Therefore only Richardson, who has already discredited himself with recent untoward remarks, is the lone nut who says we need to get out now.

How cheezy these assholes are.

(BTW -- the same thing is happening to Ron Paul. The "invisible man" thing, I mean.)

[Bigmack]

24. American arrogance....

We broke something we can't fix.

At some point, the US is going to have to accept that.

I don't know what we can do to help the Iraqis.... throw (more) money at them, maybe, but the genie of ME sectarian violence is out of the bottle, and it's not going back in soon. We can't continue spending at this level for much longer. The troops?..... where are we going to get more when the present force is worn out completely? We've already shown the world that the US military can be fought to a standstill by irregular fighters in a non-country.

Our choices are to leave ASAP or face the economic and diplomatic end of the United States.

[rocktivity]

25. Misleading Headline.

"Democratic presidential candidates are setting out positions that could leave the United States engaged in Iraq for years" is a far cry from "Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years."

:mad:
rocknation

[BridgeTheGap]

26. No more playing to the Neo-Cons! Iraq to the Iraqis, now!

We are causing more problems than we can solve there! The Iraqis must do it themselves.

[whosinpower]

35. It is easy - not difficult at all

All you have to do is say - on such and such a date - you are leaving...and follow through.
For those that say - to leave would cause a bloodbath....there is a bloodbath going on right now....staying has not quelled it.

Either the Iraqi gov. will step up to the plate - or they will fall. They are falling now. Get it over with and deal with the consequences. Propping them up just prolongs the death sentence to the country.

And finally - charge your president for invading under false pretenses. Trying to fix this horrendous mistake by staying and occupying the country only leads to further mistakes down the line. You cannot fix it going forward when the intent was wrong to begin with.

Am I being a cold hearted bastard for stating such? Who voiced concern of the people of Iraq at the beginning of the invasion? Who spoke for them? Who speaks for them when this president arrogently states better to fight Al Quaida on Iraqi land than on American land? Did anyone ask the Iraqi people if they wanted their homeland to be a battleground for something they did not start, for something they had nothing to do with? Nobody speaks for them. Not even their own government, because their own government is propped up by american interests.

[customerserviceguy]

37. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

With Hillary, and now Edwards, making these statements, we have taken Iraq off the table as an issue in the 2008 election. What's our backup issue?

It's too bad Kucinich has virtually no chance of winning even a single primary. His ideas would change the course of the debate, but they have no chance as long as he's the 5 percenter token "kook".

[Zhade]

40. Agreed.

Between the presidential candidates and the Congressional Dems' refusal to follow the rule of law and protect the Constitution by holding this criminal administration accountable, I'm hard-pressed to think of why I should even bother voting, except in local elections.

[Nutmegger]

42. Kucinich is the true peace candidate.

:kick:

[unkachuck]

43. alright....

"Democrats Say Leaving Iraq May Take Years"....it's about time you admit it....

....especially since you've never really wanted to keep us out of Iraq in the first place....so why would you want us to leave Iraq?....makes sense....

....kiss them commie social programs good-bye; Dem or repug, most of you don't like commie social programs anyway....even if we could slide them past corporate America, which we can't....

....why not start with carpet-bombing the entire Middle East back to the stone-age, kill ALL them evil-doers.....steal all that free 911 oil honorably, properly, with just-case, with NATO, and allies, and friends; you write the history books....pack a lunch, bring a friend, wave a flag, call it World War 3....

....damn, it brings a patriotic tear to my eye....now get me some $1.50 a gallon gasoline, and do the windows too....

[ronnie624]

54. Judging by the candidates' words

and the tone of the article itself, it is pretty obvious that the corporate political power structure of the US has no intention of withdrawing from Iraq. Leaving would be inconsistent with the original plan of plunder and control.

But we've known that all along, haven't we? Surely, the readily available history of US military interventions throughout the world, leaves little doubt.

[mvd]

45. It's a mess

The withdrawal, if planned well, could be done without major problems. But because of the mess Bush got us into, Iraq won't be fading from memory soon.

[roamer65]

47. Seriously, folks...buy gold, silver, platinum, etc.

This war is going to bankrupt this country and destroy our currency. I expect a full blown currency crisis soon. Preserve at least some of your money.

[MadHound]

50. Not all Dems are of this position, simply the "top tier" corporate candidates

Others, like Kucinich, have presented plans to get us out of Iraq ASAP. But sadly, it seems that even Dems can be fooled into voting against their best interest.

If you want to end this war, then it is agains your interests to vote for these corporate candidates like Hillary. They enabled the war, supported the war, what makes you think that they will end it?(and please don't say because they promised to, vaguely, at some indefinite time in the future. You know as well as I what these sorts of promises are worth.

No, the one who has the plan, who has been out front, and correct all along, has been Kucinich. Just one more reason that Kucinich is the best man for the job, perhaps the best reason.

[truthisfreedom]

51. Half of our forces on the ground are dogs of war anyway. Let's bring the volunteer army home

and let the corporations be exposed for what they are.

[Javaman]

55. Nothing like voting for change last november huh?

Yeah we got change, instead of the repukes saying we are going to stay for years, now the dems say were are going to stay for years.

welcome to the republicratic party.