Would you trade troops coming home, for * calling the war a success?

[sabra]

[SmokingJacket]

1. That's a pretty crazy question.

Save lives and let Bush look good, or let people die?

I say save lives. Duh.

[friesianrider]

11. Ditto nt

[Telly Savalas]

41. Especially in light of the fact that Bush will call the war a success

regardless of what is actually happening, it's a no-brainer.

[starroute]

2. If Bush can call the war a success, he'll do it again

The only thing that will get us out of this horrible tape loop we've been caught in for the last 55 years is to (1) have the war fail disasterously in (2) a way that can't possibly be blamed on anybody but its perpetrators.

[fryguy]

3. he's already called it a success - might as well save US lives now

ain't like he can use the "success" to run in 2008 after all. so let him run around playing with his bright red victory toy for all to see. it will continue to disgust me but i'd just like to see US soldiers out of harms way and us stop hemorrhaging money to support an occupation.

bring'em home!

[pie]

4. Yes sir: bring 'em home!

[samdogmom]

5. What the h...

Everything is a success in his book. We won't believe him.

[rox63]

6. Absolutely

Calling this disaster a success will just be one more lie, on a mountain of lies. One more lie won't matter. Saving the lives of our soldiers is paramount.

[napi21]

7. The success or failure of the war will be made wether the troops

come home or not. It also won't matter what ShrubCo says about it's success or failure. The Iraq of the future will tell the real story.

I've said all along, we should tell the Iraqis that we will train them in every dicipline necessary for them to govern themselves, but it must be done with the next XXXX months. If someone else was going to fight my battles for me, I'd sure hang back and let them do it too! I think we have to set a date certain that these folks have to take control of their Country without outside assistance.

[LynnTheDem]

8. So the Iraqis don't already know how to govern themselves???

That's just a wee bit racist, ignorant, and jaw-droppingly arrogant, isn't it?

[MadisonProgressive]

10. I don't think so

They were under a dictatorship. They were repressed and subjugated by secret police and 'officials' that were totally corrupt and viscous.

How you get racism out of that I don't know.

[LynnTheDem]

14. The Iraqis have been governing themselves for thousands of years.

They don't need us telling them how to do it.

"White man's burden" crap is racist. Telling the Iraqis they need to be shown how to "govern themselves" is ignorant and arrogant to the very extreme.

[MadisonProgressive]

17. I don't think you have a good grasp on how it's been there for the

last 30+ years. They had no real governance in the sense that we think of it.

[LynnTheDem]

20. I have an excellent grasp, thanks.

But that's besides the point. The Iraqis DO NOT WANT us to "train" them in how to "govern themselves".

Iraqis haven't been living in the Dark Ages. They've been one of the most modern progressive informed and educated nations in the entire ME.

They're more than capable of "training" themselves how to "govern themselves". They don't need America's "help". They don't want America's "help".

[MadisonProgressive]

21. To each his or her own.

[LynnTheDem]

23. Yes, EXACTLY. And IRAQ for the IRAQIS.

The IRAQIS want us OUT. NOW.

How dare ANYONE just ignore what the IRAQIS want for THEIR country, and think we know best, screw the Iraqis?! That's racist, that's ignorant, and that's arrogant.

[MadisonProgressive]

24. Quit calling me racist! I most certainly am not!

I want us out now too, but I'm savy enough to know that if we do, they will not be governing themselves, it will be a civil war and the government ultimately left standing will be worse that Saddam.

Yes, it's Bushes fault, but I still have misgivings about the terrible destruction we leveled on their country. They were MUCH BETTER off before we invaded.

ON EDIT:

And another thing! There are many Iraqis that want us there and many that don't. I haven't seen a poll breakdown.

[LynnTheDem]

25. You are saying the Iraqis are NOT CAPABLE as we are.

And yeah, that's either racist, or ignorant & arrogant, or both.

WHATEVER the IRAQIS want for THEIR COUNTRY is all that matters, and yes, in fact, the vast majority DO want us OUT NOW.

Iraq has NEVER had a civil war, and they've kicked out their share of invaders and occupiers...ask the UK about that. IF a civil war broke out, that's NOT OUR BUSINESS. We're not able to protect 2 frigging miles of highway as it is, yet you think we can prevent a civil war???

To think ONLY WE are capable of preventing a civil war (have you ANY idea how common that bullshit rhetoric is spewed by occupiers???) in Iraq, that we must IGNORE what the vast majority of Iraqis want becasue ONLY WE know what's best for them is in fact racist, ignorant and arrogant.

Go google for "poll only 2% view US as liberators, 97% as occupiers". And that was last year. The number who hate our guts & want us the f*ck out has grown a bit since then.

[MadisonProgressive]

26. You like to put a lot of words in my mouth that I never said

Keep you bullshit vitriol to yourself from now on.

[LynnTheDem]

31. 1. No, you said it very clearly yourself.

2. I will post when and how and as I please until & unless the DU owners say otherwise.

Have a nice day.

:)

[MadisonProgressive]

32. What a pill you are!

Have a nice day.

Oh and you said: You are saying the Iraqis are NOT CAPABLE as we are

I'd love you to point out where I said they are not as capable as we are. But you can't because I never said that. You just put words in my mouth and that is a reflection on you, not me.

[LynnTheDem]

34. Why thank you! :)

"I want us out now too, but I'm savy enough to know that if we do, they will not be governing themselves, it will be a civil war and the government ultimately left standing will be worse that Saddam."

So if we leave, civil war.

WHY?

Because the Iraqis aren't capable as we are.

Pretty hilarious, really, considering we can't even secure 2 miles of airport highway. That and the fact that the Iraqis want us to leave period. What YOU want or believe doesn't count for shit, nor what I want or believe; what does count is what the IRAQIS want. And that's us OUT. NOW.

But I'm thrilled to learn you can read the future, though! Even though Iraq has never had a civil war, even after they kicked out previous occupiers, even though Iraqis themselves scoff at the old and worn-out imperialist myth of "civil war if we leave", even tho so many ME experts likewise scoff, YOU know better! COOL!

:)

[MadisonProgressive]

35. This is a fascinating conclusion on your part.

"So if we leave, civil war.

WHY?

Because the Iraqis aren't capable as we are."


Doesn't seem like a logical conclusion based on what I said. You are seeing things you want to see. Why you are doing this is perplexing. I will be the grownup here and let you have the LAST word. You get one more chance to twist my words.

Peace, out.

[LynnTheDem]

36. So tell me; why would there be civil war if we leave?

You are clearly implying there will NOT be a civil war if we stay, and you are saying there WILL be a civil war if we leave.

Very obviously then you are in fact saying WE and ONLY WE can prevent a civil war in Iraq. You are, in fact, saying Iraqis CANNOT prevent a civil war in Iraq. Only WE can. And that is what I disagree with and find arrogant etc.

WHY do you believe there will be a civil war in Iraq if we leave?

There's never been civil war in Iraq.

ME experts disagree with you.

Iraqis disagree with you.

Iraq's history disagrees with you.

All imperialists use the "civil war if we leave" rhetoric; so who (other than bush & Cartel) says there will be civil war if we leave?

And what exactly are we supposed to do about preventing any civil war when we can't even secure 2 lousy miles of highway in the greenzone?

And the bottom line; the IRAQIS want us out, now. Whether you think a civil war will happen is not important. Whether I think one won't happen is not important. It is simply not your business, and not my business; nor is it yours or anyone else's right to decide for the people of Iraq. It's THEIR business and THEIR right to decide. And they decided long ago they want "all foreign troops out of Iraq".

[MadisonProgressive]

40. I can agree with this

It is simply not your business, and not my business; nor is it yours or anyone else's right to decide for the people of Iraq. It's THEIR business and THEIR right to decide. And they decided long ago they want "all foreign troops out of Iraq".

[napi21]

13. I used the word govern as an all encompasing term to include

having a well trained police force, well trained and equiped military etc. I believe there are only a few people already trained to effectively subdue the insurgents, and they need enough people to be able to do that.

If I made it sound racist, I apologize. I never intended to be anything of the kind.

I admit, my reason for believing there aren't enough trained police & military is based upon what I've heard from many media reports. If you think that's not true, then tell me where there is conflicting info.

Governing, in my opinion, is much more than just having a President/Prime Minister and a parliment.

[LynnTheDem]

15. Well let's just ask the IRAQIS what THEY want...oh look, THEY want us

the hell out of their country like yesterday.

But then, they never wanted us to invade and occupy and "shock & awe" them in the first place, and look how much their opinions mattered then.

We have NO RIGHT to tell or show or train ANY other nation how to "govern themselves".

Sorry if I sound harsh, I don't mean to to you persoanlly, but such words as "training" them how to "govern themselves" is taken as incredibly arrogant and ignorant by the vast majority of the world, not least the Iraqis themselves, and is guaranteed to set me off.

[napi21]

18. If we began a major pull out tomorrow morning, would the Iraqis

be physically able to prevent one of the insurgent groups from taking over? That's sure what's being said by even the Dems. If they can, and actually have the Country they want, then I say go for it! If they aren't able to do that, don't we have the responsibility to make sure they can before we leave? After all, we made a big mess, and we should be required to clean it up.

[LynnTheDem]

22. Who do you think the "insurgents" are?

Even the US Military generals admit 95% are IRAQIS.

And gee, aren't we doing such a FINE job of preventing the "insurgents" from taking over their own country now.

The vast majority want us OUT NOW. It's THEIR country, and it's THEIR right to do whatever or not with THEIR country.

It is NOT up to you or me or anyone else or any other nation to stay in Iraq and IGNORE what the vast majority of Iraqis want.

We DO NOT know better than the Iraqis what's best for the Iraqis. THEY want us OUT.

We broke it. so we should GET OUT as the Iraqis want us to do, and leave a signed blank check.

If (heaven forbid) you or your daughter or your sister is raped, do you think the rapist should take her to her therapy sessions to help her get over his raping her???

Do what the IRAQIS want for THEIR country; GET OUT.

Period.

[Kraklen]

9. Sabra, whenever the troops leave, be it tomorrow or in ten years..

The resistance is going to swarm over whatever pitiful puppet government we've installed. Regardless of how long we stay, the war is lost. Regardless of how bad the loss is, Bush will call it a success.

So the choice is pulling out now and getting it over with, or staying and delaying the inevitable.

[bunny planet]

12. No troops have to come home and * has to admit he lied and is a

miserable failure. Otherwise he'll bring them home and send them somewhere else again on trumped up lies. And yes, I realize that pigs will fly sooner than His Fraudulency will apologize or be accountable for anything unless he's forced to.

[gorbal]

16. Bush will call it a success anway

And sure, any homecoming/victory parade will make him look good while he does it, but at least they don't have to risk their lives killing innocent people for an unjust war for another year.. Lets just hope the soldiers in the audience have minds of their own when Bush gets up to speak:)

[Zhade]

19. Yes, he could call it that, but then I'd just show how it's a lie.

Bait and switch, baby!

[Lilith Velkor]

27. Declare victory and getthafuckout, just like Nam

Works for me. But we gotta make sure these pigfuckers can't recycle themselves into a new administration this time. Making felony convictions stick would help in this.

[leesa]

28. No. I want the troops home now and I want BushCo on trial for war crimes

and treason. No negotiation.

[Walt Starr]

29. I'd take it called a success and * getting 90+% approval out of it

Just bring 'em home. To hell with how it affects * or how good it makes him look. Just bring 'em home.

[Generic Guy]

30. Yes I would.

The right wing could slobber all over him for years to come but, at least the killing would stop. Hopefully the tide is truly turning this time. Hopefully sanity will return to our once great nation.

[fob]

33. He* already did call it a success, he*s just too fucking stupid to take

the next step and bring 'em home for their parade.

"Mission Accomplished" - g w bumblefuck bush* May 2003

[B Calm]

37. Do the troops think they are doing the right thing in Iraq?

I DON'T THINK SO!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. He can name it Texas and call it Beautiful. It's still a lost war.

As warmakers, BushCorp and their much vaunted military are a flop.

The world's mightiest military with all their high-tech weaponry can't control a 3rd world country or defeat a bunch of raggedy-ass guerrillas armed with light arms and explosives.

It's interesting to see them falling back on "body counts" like they did in Vietnam. 50 dead "insurgents" here, 40 there, etc. Pretty soon we'll have killed the whole population except for a "few desperate holdouts" holed up next to the "light at the end of the tunnel".

[evermind]

39. He'll call it a success whatever happens - congenital liar. (n/t)