Last Gasps in Iraq

[shadowknows69]

I supported this war, but the deteriorating situation is starting to convince me that we can’t win. Those of us who hoped that the Iraqis could achieve democracy were wrong — and their failure has implications for the entire region.
By Ralph Peters

On Tuesday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki obeyed Muqtada al-Sadr's command to withdraw U.S. troops from Baghdad's Sadr City. He halted a vital U.S. military operation. It was the third time in less than a month that al-Maliki had sided with the anti-American cleric against our forces.

(Illustration by Adrienne Lewis, USA TODAY)

President Bush insists that we have no conflicts with the al-Maliki government. The president isn't telling the truth — or he himself doesn't support our military's efforts. He can't have it both ways. Bush appears increasingly desperate just to get through the upcoming elections.

I supported the removal of Saddam Hussein. I believed that Arabs deserved a chance to build a rule-of-law democracy in the Middle East. Based upon firsthand experience, I was convinced that the Middle East was so politically, socially, morally and intellectually stagnant that we had to risk intervention — or face generations of terrorism and tumult. I still believe that our removal of Hussein was a noble act.

I only wish the administration had done it competently.

more <http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/11/post_6.html>

Former supporters saying we've lost coming out of the woodwork.

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. US forces taking orders from a foreign leader

Isn't this the sort of thing that use to make the freepers heads explode?

[Demit]

2. Interesting read, but not LBN.

[shadowknows69]

3. Sorry

Mods feel free to boot it wherever.

[leftchick]

4. Pandora's Box

I heard a lot of people screaming this would happen way before it did. Dumb fuckheads who believed otherwise.

[noamnety]

5. He still doesn't get it

"Even six months ago, there was hope."

"Yet, for all our errors, we did give the Iraqis a unique chance to build a rule-of-law democracy. They preferred to indulge in old hatreds, confessional violence, ethnic bigotry and a culture of corruption."

"The violence staining Baghdad's streets with gore isn't only a symptom of the Iraqi government's incompetence, but of the comprehensive inability of the Arab world to progress in any sphere of organized human endeavor."

He's still an ignorant xenophobic bigot who believes in colonialism as a concept, and is depressed those "other" people aren't civilized enough to understand we're just trying to help them.

[Barrett808]

7. Yes, he's dead wrong in several ways.

Iraqis are hardly "gleeful about 'our' humiliation" -- there's no glee there at all. Iraqi's don't "comprehend" the scale of the disaster? Give me a freaking break.

Patronizing crap. But at least he's turned on the Bush mafia.

[Ethelk2044]

6. Leaving a Soldier Behind

The army has a never believed in leaving any soldier behind. 
 It sounds like the repugs are drinking from a water cooler
with 100 proof whiskey. The army has also never let another 
government determine what happens with its soldiers except
when we have a weak president such as bush.  The Dems needs
to make sure that we find the soldier and get him out.  This
includes using special forces if necessary.  The prime
minister of Iraq has no place in telling the US  what we 
can and can not do when it comes to this. The only time
they will do this is when we have a weak administration
such as the one we have now.  In the next war, are we
going to wait till that government decides what to do.  
Let our soldiers die because the government does not want 
us to go here or there.  If that is the case the prime 
minister needs to be told, we will pull all of our troops out.

The prime minister is making the soldiers job much harder
and our administration is allowing it because the
administration
 does not know what to do.  They do not have the guts to
 stand up to the Prime Minister.  They do not have the 
right people in the right places.  Rummie needs to go along 
with other top officials.  They need to put Powell or another
General in his place.  Someone who has fought are war in the
past. 
We took the wrong stance, when we allowed the prime minister
to 
tell us we can no longer look for one of our own.  Other 
governments in future wars will feel the have the right to do 
the same.  Where are the democratic congress why aren't they 
using the media to get this point across.  They should all be
in the media speaking about this.  All of them should be
pissed off.
Like I am.
 

[Kagemusha]

8. It's only their own bleeping country after all.

No right to tell the invading force holding it what to do. That would just be wrong.

[Ethelk2044]

9. Iraq Country

Your right it is there country and they need to defend their
own country and we need to get the hell out.  This war is not
worth another one of our soldier's life.

[noamnety]

10. Not Powell

Unless you're looking to replace Rumsfeld with someone who has experience in cover-ups and corruption. In that case, he's your man. His claim to fame is covering up the My Lai massacre, and his life's work has been selling ethics for political favors ever since.

[goforit]

11. How can you support democracy by submitting to a tyrrannical leader-BUSH

Adrienne Lewis?....
Are you delusional?

If you think we live in a Democracy with three branches of power, GET REAL!!!!

[Ethelk2044]

12. Missing Soldier

Hopefully people will wake up really soon!