We're turning over govt. control because of attacks. Did we win in Iraq?

[prolesunited]

How are they going to spin this to try to make it sound good?

What do you think the results in Iraq will be?

On edit: I didn't phrase this correctly. So, I fixed it.

[sniffa]

1. hey

hey, i puLLed out.. i can't possibLy be the father of your bastard chiLd.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. We didn't pull out. Our kids are still dying over there. It's just

Bremer who is home safe and sound.

[Gin]

5. I heard on CNN that the only member of the new government who knew

of the early handover was the new president (or whatever he is called.) That tells me they can't trust the rest.

Shrub didn't want the fact that our soldiers are losing their heads to preempt his handover show.

[rkc3]

15. It took...

Bremer five minutes to make his speech on get on the first plane out of Iraq.

He either didn't want to be around when the shit hit the fan or he didn't want Negroponte to confuse him with a Baath supporter and end up in a mystery hole.

[olacan]

3. Where

did you hear/read we are withdrawing, what I have heard so far is we have turned over operation to the Iraq Gov. The troops will still be there to assist with security. It is far from a safe area, and it will take a lot more work there. I for one am glad to see what I consider a step forward for the people of Iraq.

[arcane1]

9. a step foward?

:shrug:


Funny, when foreign invaders are still in control of police and security, when foreign puppets are in charge of my government, and when foreign corporations own every single one of my countries assets, I consider that a step backwards.

This is "forward" only in a PR sense

[prolesunited]

16. Who knows?

Perhaps this poster works in PR — you know, to balance all the FH9/11 lies we've been subjected to. :shrug:

:hi:

[arcane1]

18. PR is ALL THEY HAVE

:hi: :hi:

[htuttle]

4. There's no pullout, except for Proconsul Bremer

...To be replaced by Proconsul Negroponte.

In fact, they are sending more troops over there right now -- I'd bet there will end up being more US troops in Iraq in Oct '04 than there were in Oct '03.

[prolesunited]

10. I phrased it poorly

Tried to fix. If it's still unclear, maybe I should just delete. I feel like I'm having a major brain fart here.

[never cry wolf]

6. Nope, it's unwinnable

A thread I started yesterday that went nowhere quick, from the trib.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1872143&mesg_id=1872143

Facing up to defeat in Iraq
A game plan that makes the best of a tinderbox

By Marvin Zonis. Marvin Zonis is a professor emeritus in the Graduate School of Business at the University of Chicago and a co-author of "The Kimchi Matters: Global Business and Local Politics in a Cr
Published June 27, 2004

Expect a massive U.S. defeat in Iraq. By defeat, I mean that we will not accomplish any of the goals articulated by President Bush for starting the war against Saddam Hussein and Iraq.

We will not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq because there are none to be found. But the U.S. invasion has guaranteed the increased proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. Iran, certain that if it possessed a nuclear arsenal, those weapons could deter any American invasion of its country, is rushing headlong to develop them.

We will not end Iraq's support for international terrorism because there was no Iraq support for terrorism before the U.S. invasion. But the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq has acted like a magnet to attract terrorists longing to inflict casualties and defeat the U.S. in its Iraq adventure.

We will not create a democracy in Iraq because while advanced weapons and sophisticated communications equipment can accomplish many things, they cannot bring about the democratization of a society. That requires the social or psychological prerequisite for democracy, utterly absent in Iraq. In fact, it is quite strange that having invaded Iraq for the benefit of Iraqis, we have not managed to collect any data on the number of Iraqis we have killed or wounded in the course of trying to liberate them from tyranny. But what we have managed to do is generate so much hatred around the Islamic world that a surge of recruitment to terrorist organizations has occurred.

more (free registration req'd.)----------> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/oped/chi-0406270401jun27,1,...

on edit: Hi, Sharon :hi:

[Nadienne]

14. If a real, true Democracy is born in Iraq

it will be in spite of us, not because of us. They seem to want it; they seem willing to fight for it. We'll never "win", and Bush will certainly never pull out.

[aden_nak]

7. Definitions

It's all about the definitions. Winning and losing is a matter of how you define them, really. It's not like a game of basketball, where there's a scoreboard. Here's how I see it.

Internal to BushCo, the Iraqi War was a huge win. They achieved sufficient control over the oil reserves, set up the military bases they'd been after, and captured Saddam Hussein, who was a very lose, ragged end for a lot of prominent Republicans. There is the public opinion fallout to deal with, but hey, that's Marketing's job.

External to BushCo, in reality, it's a loss. We did not stabalize the region. We did not recover any Weapons of Mass Destruction. We increased, rather than decreased, the number of terrorists active in Iraq. We have no guarantees about the future government of Iraq. We have suffered unnecessary casualties, and damaged our credibility as a nation.

And now for the spin:

Our job here in Iraq is finally coming to a close. Liberty and freedom is being restored, and the murderous nightmare of Saddam Hussein's regime has been vanquished. No longer can al Queda rely on the support of the Iraqi government. Democracy is budding in Iraq, and the people of Iraq are taking control of their government for the first time. By capturing a madman, and replacing his tyrany with a democratic nation, we have furthered the cause of peace in the Middle East.

Wow, I feel unclean just having typed that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Of course we won! It's called "Peace With Honor".

Oh, sorry. That's been used. When is that helicopter leaving from the embassy roof in Baghdad?

[DrWeird]

No pullout. In fact, this is the most disasterous non-pullout...

since Poppy didn't pull out of Barbara in 1945.

[Zero Gravitas]

11. 14 Permanent Military bases Under Construction

in Iraq. We're not going anywhere.

[Individualist]

12. Who's pulling out

besides Bremer? There is no pullout.

[jobycom]

13. Depends on who wins in November

We haven't pulled anything out. Bush is still trying to send more troops, and he isn't bringing the others home. This is exactly the same type of transfer of power as the transfer of Saddam Hussein. We are officially transferring power, but not actual control of the physical company.

How will this turn out? As long as we have troops there, nothing will change. When they drive our troops out, either another Hussein or an Ayotolah Komeini will take over. Or else the country will just fragment.

If we get a grownup in office, you know, one who isn't playing Lord of the Flies, we could work with the UN and other Arab nations as diplomatic gaurantors as we did in Yugoslavia's remains, and perhaps establish something good out of the horror we have created. But it won't happen under Bush. The first step is admitting you have a problem, and Bush won't even admit he made a mistake.

[Nadienne]

17. I wonder if the early "hand over"

was due to F9/11? Bush & Co trying to take center stage after the obvious success of F9/11?