Leaving Iraq is more Ludicrous than staying.

[Perky]

Look I am not defending the invasion. It was incredibly shortsighted and stupid to think that it would be a cake walk; and it certainly was naive to think we would be treated as liberators... Worst of all it is both arrogant and extremely naive to think that imposing a republican form of government in the middle east even with modest democratic gains would ever--I mean EVER-- be viable.

FOr GOd's sake did the Neo-Cons not realize when dreaming up this lunacy that when it came to writing a constitution that the Wahabiists and the conservatives would demand that the rights of women be curtailed to conform to Islamic law? They are never going to be able to have a viable constitutional framework....Private militias will flourish and Hesbollah, and Hamas will be fighting Al Qua-da for control of the slums of Sadr city. And it is completely our fault,

This country teeters on the brink of civil war because there is no strongman government and that is our fault. To pick up and depart would mean Iraq would turn into an old Afghanistan and Baghdad into a much larger Beirut. This is why Bush I decided not to invade.


Having said that. WE HAVE TO STAY. I wish there was another course but I do not see it. It has nothing to do with saving face or oil.

Its not about sending the wrong message.... It it about the inevitability of this becoming an impoverished state with the Kurds creating an autonomous government in the north, el-Histani taking his cues from Tehran and Hezbollah finding fertile ground to exploit for terror training camps in the western desert with Syria's blessing. Its about Al queda becoming entrenched in the Baghdad slums as a political force with private armies. THis is again Beirut all over again. AND IT IS ALL BUSH'S FAULT!!!!

This Fiasco is the worst strategic move in US Government history. This is Bush's folly. This is nothing short of a Debacle and a quagmire.

Oh if only idiocy was an impeachable offense.


I just do not see how we can leave because it gives the country over to warlords and thugs, Zealots and nationalists.

[SammyWinstonJack]

1. You mean like Afghanistan? We abandoned that Country and

the Taliban have regained control. Aren't the warlords and thugs(read U.S.),Zealots and nationalists already in charge of Iraq? Sure, lets stay until the causality #s reach that of VietNam.

[Perky]

8. That's my point

by leaving Iraq will slide in to Bedlam and Bedlam is the petri dish of all sorts of catastophes.

The Kurds Break away... and you will see skirmishes with Turkey.

You let the SHii dominate the legislature and try to turn back the clock on women's rights you will havesuffrajettes being dragged through the strees ans summaily beheaded.

You think the prime misiter will ever be stron enough to to fight Hesz, hamas and Al Queda when Iran is marking territorial demand onthe eastern edge of the country?

[SammyWinstonJack]

45. Do you actually think our current regime wants democracy

in Iraq? Do you think our current regime wants a stable Democratic government in Iraq? All I see is more slaughter on both sides as long as we are there. We have destroy Iraq and we show no signs of bringing peace, much less democracy to the Iraqi people! How have we made the Iraqi people better off? It seems to me, we have made matters worse and by the looks of it, we aren't going to make it any better by staying. Bushco** screwed up and I don't see a solution as long as they are in charge. Bushco** created that petri dish of catastrophes. You honestly think we will make it better by staying where we clearly are not welcome? I say we get out and let the UN( leave Bolton out of it) in. BTW all you have pointed out, is a result of the messed up policy of bushco**. It is happening whether we stay or leave. It's too late to stop it, but we can stop the slaughter of American troops. I say get out now! Just my two cents worth.

[NoSheep]

95. On edit: I say, let's get some folks who HAVE NO SELF INTEREST!

Do you think that is possible? Jimmy Carter and his people. take out the fire power and put in the helpers and healers. YES! We should not abandon a mess. But no more fighting and no more killing by our armed forces. And no more advocating the idea unless YOU are willing to go!!!

[kentuck]

2. I disagree...

The people getting killed in Iraq, other than the ones we are killing, are American soldiers and Iraqi supporters of US military. That is where most of the violence is directed. If the US military was not there, I'm sure there would still be some violence, but I doubt it would be as prevalent as now. We are the magnet that is attracting the violence. We are not bringing peace or democracy to that place. We are bringing violence and anarchy. Once we leave, there will be a struggle for power, and I would be surprised if Iraq turned into a democracy. However, the Iraqi people are not stupid. They know that whatever leaders that are on the ballot in the next election, will be those favored by the US government. They will be puppets. There will be no peace until we leave. Even if it might be slow in coming.

[wtmusic]

3. we should leave tomorrow

the country is already under the control of thugs, zealots, and nationalists.

No right to be there, and we're just prolonging the inevitable.

[still_one]

23. actually what will happen is that it will become

a Shiite theocracy when we leave. If we stay, it will only prolong the enevitable, a Shiite theocracy, but at an even greater cost

[wtmusic]

26. We should probably plug Saddam on the way out

just to be sure...

[still_one]

35. The Shiite's will do that

[Imagevision]

82. Rumfeld hasn't made good on the armor - commanders on the

ground have been asking for more troops on the ground until Rummy told them they ca start looking for new careers if they feed this news to the media.

"Insurgents" take back Fallujah yet??

[lonestarnot]

88. Today!

[The_Casual_Observer]

4. "think that it would be a cake walk"

Why not, that's how it was sold.

Exactly how much progress do you think is going to be made there if we stay a while longer? Do you really think that in 5 years we will "win"? What indication do you get from the "progress" so far that time is the answer?

What makes you think that if we stay for even 10 years, that the next day after we leave the place isn't going to be overrun by "Warlords"

[Perky]

22. I don't think any progress will be made

None whatsoever

I am more worried about what happen if we leave. . If I thought it was jst going to be an iternal struggle for control I would say Sayanorah... but as foolish as it was to think thes folks would embrace democracy...it is just as foolish to think that they will not ultimately embrace Wahabiism.

[The_Casual_Observer]

30. "ultimately embrace Wahabiism" embrace it now or later

the only difference is going to be how many lives are lost trying to stop it in the mean time. The similarities of these arguments to Vietnam are astounding. The more you to prevent it, the more they think they need it and the hard they will fight.

[tabasco]

32. Self-determination.

If we weren't trying to tell so many countries what to do, we wouldn't have so many enemies. By staying in Iraq, we violate their right to self-determination and foster the belief that the US is an aggressor nation.

[paulk]

84. Wahabism believes Shiites are heretics

so ... I don't see how this "embrace" is gonna happen.

[sandnsea]

5. Homeward Bound

Which I keep kicking, is about promoting a policy in a manner that focuses on the fact that we're leaving. That is what's wrong with Bush's policy, he keeps saying we're staying there to fight terrorists and won't leave until the terrorists are gone. The attacks will never stop. Changing the policy to focus on LEAVING will change the environment in Iraq. Homeward Bound does not call for immediate withdrawal and she says so herself, it's a step in the right direction. So what Kucinich, Woolsey and almost every other Democrat proposes, is changing the focus to leaving so that we can really get out.

[Inland]

6. But this argument presumes minimum competence from the admin.

in pursuit of the stated goals of democracy and stability.

If Kerry were president, I would be inclined to listen.

But Bush is president, and the same crew that's fucked things up is going to be in charge for the next three years.

They don't know what they are doing and don't care about what happens, as long as they don't get blamed for it. Their goals are all over the map, everyone is running and hiding and carving out different positions, trial balloons are floated and yanked back.

Covering up is the main tool.

Bush is resolved to be resolved, and has no other goal.

So, you can draw up all the fancy plays on paper you want, but there's a bunch of nincompoops on the field who won't or can't execute it.

Give up. It won't work. Every day that Iraq is in Bush's hands is a day that things aren't going to get better.

[KG]

7. so, you dont care how many soldiers gotta die? or how much money

is passed over to halliburton?


and get this, iraq isn't 'tettering' on the edge of a civil war, there is a full fledged civil war going on now, the the US started it.

[Imagevision]

9. Bush said last Ocyober that 130,000 Iraqi troops would be trained by

January 30th 05 - like all others lies , his shit is coming back at him, today the commanders on the ground are worried that insurgents have infiltrated the Iraqi Oilice and their Army - doesn't sound like the terrorists? are too stupid! Rumsfeld! and where the fuck is the armor pigshit!

[Generator]

10. I don't care about Iraq/I care about America

I want America defended. I want America to have a democracy. Iraq can do whatever it wants as long as it means no harm to me-and it hasn't. But fine, let's have as many die as possible and then they can do whatever they want. Because they will in the end. Just like Vietnam. Our job is not to stop their civil war for as long as possible. That's all we are doing-delaying their civil war and instead, they can just kill us and we can spend every cent we don't have while making corps like Halliburton and KKR rich. You can't tell people how to live and what government to have. It doesn't work. All you can do is make sure they leave you alone or else-that's why a threat of war is really a win win for everyone. The actual war is a disaster, because of everything I just said. You cannot "help" people that don't want you there. They don't want us there. I've heard it out of the soldiers mouths. I guess they would know.

Bush is not president of Iraq, though he seems to think so. For all the America first types-on the other side-they seem to fail this basic logic course.

[Mr_Spock]

11. That's why we never should have done it in the first place

I bet they will recover faster without us.

[Ignoramus]

12. America has NO authority over Iraq. America does not rule the world

You are falling victim to the situation being framed as the wrong issue.
When someone says "Iraq", it should bring to mind the problem in Iraq. What is the problem in Iraq?

The problem in Iraq is that a military aggressor has committed a massacre and is occupying it's victims' country. What is the solution to that problem? Obviously not, to have the aggressor's crimes continue.

America is the magnet that draws terror and death to Iraq.

There isn't a good solution and a bad solution. There is a bad solution, which is the result of relative anarchy in Iraq, and some sort of civil warfare, and there is the worse solution, which is that, plus the presence of the criminal invaders, serving as a beacon to draw ever increasing waves of death and terror.

[steve2470]

13. With all due respect and with complete sincerity on my part...

would you sacrifice one of your kids or family members for that cause ? If you can honestly say yes to that, then you have my respect. I still disagree with you.

[Perky]

25. of course not

Becaude the cause is not just.

Not by any strectch


We broke theri country. and now we don't have the capacity to fix it.

[KG]

29. you wouldn't sacrifice for this cause, but you don't mind if others do?

[Perky]

38. twenty years of Chaos

I am just saying that puling out may reap an even deeper harvest of resentment and retribution.

In fact I am 80 percent sure that it wil...

Move me down to 65% amd I'l glady fly some kids home myself.,,, but convince me that a strongman can emerger and prevent 20 years of chaos.

[KG]

40. ok, staying in iraq is cool so long as someone else gets killed. gotcha

[Darranar]

14. The US is not going to solve anything...

It will merely kill more people and excaberate the problems.

As for "warlords and thus, zealots and nationalists," those are exactly the people (with the exception of "nationalists," which in the case of Iraq is not at all a bad thing) who will run the country if it is under US control, and who are trying to run the country now with US support. In fact, our own country is being run by such people.

The Iraqis have a far better chance of solving their problems without the US trying to attain dominance over them.

[punpirate]

15. Okay, given all your arguments for what has happened...

... how, then, does staying for years improve any of those conditions?

I don't see that assessment in your post. All these things are taking place now, billions of dollars have not helped, and the American occupation is fueling much of the violence.

"We" aren't the ones having to stay--the soldiers are the ones having to do so.

Here's a clue to our government's actual intentions: at no time did the Bush administration ever ask the UN to create a peacekeeping force to replace American forces, before or after the invasion. We want to make a puppet state of Iraq and to make it a grand experiment in the privatization of an entire country--for the benefit of US multinational corporations. That's not a noble cause, and it's not one for which another single soldier should die.

It's not going to get better with time.

Cheers.

[Mountainman]

16. Fuck Iraq! I don't give a shit about Iraq. I want our soldiers brought

home and I want the money spent on social programs over here!

NO WE DON'T HAVE TO STAY IN IRAQ!

[still_one]

24. don't be ambiguous, tell us what you really mean?

[welshTerrier2]

17. sorry but ...

that's just plain crazy ...

i don't believe there is any evidence that the US has achieved anything positive in Iraq ... if we stay another year, or two, or five, or ten or 100, that is just not going to change ...

the presence of the US military on Iraqi soil is the problem ... we are the reason so many are fighting ... as long as the US remains, there is no path to peace ...

and as for all the talk of thugs running the country, Iraq is in, or about to be in, a civil war WITH US TROOPS PRESENT ... what exactly is being done to "stabilize" the country?? ... we've been "training Iraqi troops" for two and a half years and they can't, and won't, defend anything ... the entire process is an absurdity ...

if you're arguing that the US has an obligation to help Iraq, count me IN ... we need to provide whatever humanitarian aid and infrastructure support is needed ... but if you're arguing that continued occupation will lead to anything but more deaths, more costs and more instability, count me OUT ...

whatever noble objectives you may be seeking in Iraq will never be achieved while the US military continues the occupation ...

[Cocoa]

18. we don't know what would happen if we left

that dire result might happen and it might not.

And if we stay, it might happen anyway and our troops would just be caught in the middle.

And if we stay, it might make it worse.

I wouldn't be so sure about "having said that, we have to stay," which a lot of people are asserting with way too much certainty.

[zippy890]

37. yes, 'we have to stay'

is said with way too much certainty -- for what? until when? how many deaths and injuries to accomplish what goals?

its time to take our military out of Iraq - now. They are an occupying force and a magnet for violence.

[kentuck]

19. The only reason to stay in Iraq is to save face of Bush and Repubs...

And how many more must die for his lie and the Republican Party defense of that lie? There is no other reason to stay in that country. It was wrong then and it is wrong now. Not one more life should be sacrificed for this blunder. We can declare victory tomorrow and withdraw out troops. We did not find any WMDs. Saddam Hussein has been overthrown. The Iraqis have had an election. It is now up to the Iraqi people. The only reason to stay is to prevent the political payback to Bush and the Republicans that they so deserve.

[still_one]

20. really, we are in the middle of a civil war

that will eventually be a Shiite theocracy, and there is nothing we will be able to do about it, except sacrifice Americans and Iraqiis lives

but if you really feel that way, then take the words of Cindy

“If you fall on the side that is pro-George, and pro-war, you get your ass over to Iraq, and take the place of somebody who wants to come home. And if you fall on the side that is against this war and against George Bush, stand up and speak out.”

"But whatever side you fall on, quit being on the fence."

"The opposite of good is not evil, it’s apathy. And we have to get this country off their butts, and we have to get the choir singing."

[Imagevision]

21. I'm thinking that Iraq is heading towards a "Tet offensive" situation

[chieftain]

27. There is nothing ludicrous about leaving Iraq ASAP.

The consequences are likely to be dire, but staying with no real possibility of contributing to a stable government is only postponing the inevitable.
The best course would be to call a peace conference, renounce plans to have permanent bases in the area, rescind any deals that gave preferences to Iraqui oil to US concerns, throw Halliburton and all the rest of the crooks out of the country and ask for an Arab peace keeping force to move into the void created by our leaving.
We would have to recognize a de facto partition of the country and a huge increase in power and prestige for the Iranians and possibly the Syrians. But that is probably the only way to avoid a failed state that would be a base for terrorist attacks on us and our allies.
One thing I do agree with you on is that this is Little George and the Republicans' fault. Our continuing message has got to be that the people who have visited this travesty on Iraq,America and the world are not fit to govern. As a matter of fact they are only fit to spend the rest of their lives in prison.

[barb162]

96. Arab peace keeping force

How could you get a neutral Arab force that wouldn't be taking sides. I think there is a slim chance the new government could succeed if they get Iraqi police and military geared up and operating soon. And if we get out at the same time. But a lot of the killing going on in Iraq right now is sheer terrorism, insurgency and fundmentalist terrorism ... killing of professionals, intellectuals, police, uppity women, etc.
See this from snips from the interview below: "I know of 20 women, colleagues and friends, who have been assassinated. They fit a certain profile—educated, professional."

---------------
snips
From an interview in Village Voice
Talking with Zainab Salbi, defender of women's rights in tough places

by Aina Hunter
August 11th, 2005 4:22 PM

"With the final draft of the proposed new constitution due August 15, Zainab spent last week in New York, pressing the plight of women in Iraq.

snip

After Hussein was deposed, women reported feeling suddenly threatened by their acquaintances and neighbors—they got warnings to dress differently, for example. Sometimes the intimidation reaches the level of death threats. Why did men turn against their sisters and peers?

I always say that under Hussein the violence was top-down. Now it's horizontal. Iraq has become a free-for-all. But still, the greatest danger isn't from neighbors, it's from the insurgents. I know of 20 women, colleagues and friends, who have been assassinated. They fit a certain profile—educated, professional. It's a message we must not ignore.

At one time you considered temporarily closing your office in Iraq because of the danger posed to outspoken women.

Our staff begged us not to. Now we operate very carefully. We don't hold meetings. We work on the ground, in secret. I can't divulge a lot of details for security reasons. But the staff are all Iraqi—they are usually from the provinces they work, so they are not outsiders to the women they work with. The fact that they are associated with us is kept quiet for their safety. "
-----------
If the new government doesn't succeed in getting rid of the zealot Islamist nutcases ("freedom fighters" to some people), either home-grown or foreign, educated women (and men)who open their mouths for civil rights/against sharia law in that country will be dead. Ten doctors were killed yesteray by gunmen.

[chieftain]

97. There is no such thing as neutrality in this situation.

The best that you can hope for is an understanding that order is better than chaos. That's why I think it important to recognize that Iraq will cease to exist as presently formed and that the net result will be a transfer of power from the Us and the UK to regional states which, hopefully will have a stake in a semblance of order and normalcy.

[barb162]

99. Well ,one of the first things I thought

when I started checking on things over there was that the country would split in 3 groups. I thought if it didn't split there could easily be endless fighting unless all the groups had a stake in seeing the new government survive.

[leftchick]

28. Well how about we see what Iraqis say about the US Occupiers staying

All but the US puppets in the Green Zone want the US the fuck out of there. I do too. Bring our troops home and pay the Billions in Reparations with a giant I Am Sorry Card. :grr:



Holding American flags, a demonstration of dozens of Iraqis, calling themselves The White Revolutionists Movement, gather outside the US military base demanding the withdrawal of military occupation, Thursday, Aug. 11, 2005, in Baqouba, 60 kms. (35 miles) north of Baghdad, Iraq. (AP Photo/Mohammed Adnan)



Tearing American and Israeli flags, a demonstration by dozens of Iraqis, calling themselves The White Revolutionists Movement, gather outside the US military base demanding the withdrawal of military occupation, Thursday, Aug. 11, 2005, in Baqouba, 60 kms. (35 miles) north of Baghdad, Iraq. (AP Photo/Mohammed Adnan)

[H2O Man]

31. I respectfully disagree.

There is no evidence that Iraqi people are an inferior breed, who require the Bush administration to teach them how to live.

There is no evidence the US military is bringing "peace" or "order" to Iraqi society.

There is plenty of evidence that shows that as long as the US is there, the violence will continue.

There can be no democracy in Iraq if we are there as an occupying force. There will be no reduction in violence when we are causing increased violence.

The USA needs to get out of Iraq today.

[steve2470]

34. Amen, Mr. Water Molecule ! nt

[Perky]

41. Any rationale view of Middle east History shows how wrong you are

Look at Beirut... look at Kabul.

WHen the Wahbisit start exescutin woment by the sword. And the will....You will see it on el jazeera

[steve2470]

48. Respectfully, you may want to consider enlisting yourself

If you are of the right age. The other alternative is to go recruit other suitable candidates, with the UPFRONT admission that there is a good chance that they may die for this "mission".

[Perky]

54. ARRRGGGGHHHHHHH!

WOuld you please go baxk and read the original post. I am not defending our involvment there, Not in the least. We opened pandora's box and she ain;t gonna let us close it again.

[steve2470]

64. No thanks.

I don't believe in dying in a war that I don't believe in. World War II was a just war, as far as I know. The ones since 1945 I have serious questions about, even Afghanistan. I try to be ethically consistent: If I'm not willing to die in a war, I'm sure as hell not going to advocate anyone else die there either.

The Iraqis, unfortunately, just need to clean up the mess and we can pay them reparations, as if that will revive their dead loved ones.

[H2O Man]

67. You use the word "we"

("We opened a pandora's box...") But you don't behave in a way that backs that "we" up. You are advocating that other people fight, kill, and die in a war that you "aren't defending" .... but that you are in favor of others fighting. That is the reason the person suggested you back up your brave stance with more than words and a willingness to let others do the fighting.

[Perky]

76. UMMMM NO

If blue helmets would replace uis and keep the peace I would all for it

[H2O Man]

80. Actually, yes.

You are just willing to let someone else do it. You have errors in thinking that are shown with statements like "keep the peace." Few people would define what is occuring in Iraq today as "peace."

[donco6]

98. Doesn't matter what color the helmets are.

They're still people. You're advocating "we" stay, while "others" put their lives on the line for a pointless, senseless endeavour. Don't you see the problem with that?

[Redstone]

73. So what, exactly DO you think we'll accomplish by staying?

You haven't said.

Come on, what's your plan? Tell us now, or with all due respect, your opinion is full of baloney.

You say we shouldn't leave, but you don't say why we should stay.

Let's hear it.

Fuck, I get so sick of people saying "we have to stay there until the job is done."

What fucking job????? Another Wall with 53,000 names on it?

Redstone

[H2O Man]

51. Oh. The "White Man's Burden."

Noble of you. Unrealistic, but noble.

Darned good things our executions aren't on PPV.

[steve2470]

52. Who originated that concept ?

Did that somehow come out of the Christian Bible ?

[H2O Man]

62. That doesn't matter.

What does is that you are advocating it now.

[steve2470]

66. I'm NOT advocating that LOL

You must mean the OP.

[H2O Man]

69. Sorry!

My error. I wasn't paying close enough attention. I assumed it was the OP.

[steve2470]

72. No problem. I knew you clicked on the wrong post.

:-)

[H2O Man]

79. Thank you

for understanding. I am concerned when people buy into the lie that our being in Iraq is promoting peace, or reducing violence. It is, as you know, just the opposite. I do not question that someone can sincerely believe that we are obligated to be there .... but it is important to confront that error in thinking. I assumed wrongly that the OP was attempting to take the focus off what he has said in his OP .... as several of the posts here indicate.

[steve2470]

81. Yes, I as well.

For me, this issue he/she brought up is very simple. Nail, meet hammer. To throw in all the other logic and data converts the hammer into a piledriver of sheer logic. I cannot believe that this person is willing to sacrifice other humans but not her family. He/She is lucky that he/she is not saying that to people in person.

[H2O Man]

70. dupe

[Perky]

42. Any rationale view of Middle east History shows how wrong you are

Look at Beirut... look at Kabul.

WHen the Wahbisit start exescutin woment by the sword. And the will....You will see it on el jazeera

[H2O Man]

60. This is exactly what

you said on post #41. Saying it twice doesn't make you right.

On a serious note, try to examine our culture objectively. While it may be just fine for you -- hopefully -- and indeed many, many people want to come to this country every day, it is not superior to the extent that we should feel justified in invading other nations in order to impose our value system.

If we believe in democracy, in the sense of voting rights, the truth is that Islamic countries are going to "elect" Islamic governments, no matter how strongly you want it to be otherwise, or how many other Americans' lives you are so willing to sacrifice while you sit safely at home.

As Robert Kennedy said about US policy in Vienam, "Wise policy is a setting of priorities -- differentiating between that which is merely important and that which is truly essential. And it would be both callous and self-indulgent for those of us who sit comfortably at home to form policy without full knowledge and consciousness of the costs to others, young men and women and children, whose lives turn on the abstraction of our discussion."

His description of the self-indulgent was not limited to politicians.

[Perky]

68. I completely agree wiht self determinations

The problem is Slef Determination has about 5 different faces and it cuts 100 different ways in Iraq and the differences are not reconcialible withing the costraints of either Islamic or Baathist or Kurdish or Whahabist os modernist cultural norms.


It is folly to think that they can work this ouit with out a huger blud letting.

[H2O Man]

75. There is no

self-determination when there is an occupying force. And, were you to look closely, you might notice a "blud letting."

[Redstone]

77. You're drinking quite a lot tonight, aren't you?

It shows quite obviously as your posts and the time of night progress.

Maybe you ought to go get some rest.

Redstone

[steve2470]

83. By Jove, I thought you've got it

/faux English accent off.

[Redstone]

85. It's been a pretty steady downward progression

in typing ability.

Though the thinking ability was never there at all, apparently.

Redstone

[Redstone]

33. Bullshit. Simon-pure, unadulterated bulllshit.

Do you really think the "warlords and thugs, Zealots and nationalists" aren't going to be the ones taking over, no matter how long we stay there?

If you do, you're seriously deluded.

One more dead American is one too many.

One more Iraqi civilian killed by an American is one too many.

I'd suggest you politely decline the Kool-Aid next it's offered to you.

Redstone

[evilqueen]

36. Here's what I would be in favor of...

How about this: As we bring the troops home, we replace them with neocons and others who hate our freedom? Oh, and they can eat the filthy, bug-infested food they sent to our troops too.

[Perky]

39. Damn That is a brilliant solution

That is realy the best way to solve this wholde damn mess!!!!!!!!!

[Warren DeMontague]

43. What is the First Rule Of Holes?

What is the First Rule of Holes?

What is the First Rule of Holes?

What is the First Rule of Holes?

[GoBlue]

44. Perhaps another 'catastrophic success' would enlighten you.

'Fiasco', 'folly', 'debacle', 'quagmire' ... And you don't see why we should give Iraq back to the Iraqis?

[Perky]

49. The point it that Iraqis would not rule the country if we gave it back

If you understand that It was us infidels that created Iraq in the last century

You would realizae that Iraq as it historically know is a fiction held together by Sadaam's Baathist thugs. THey are gone and there is nothing that is going to put this humpty dumty togehter again/

[Mountainman]

58. The point is that this is PNAC operation and we should end it asap

Certain people are making millions off this war and want to make millions more. They are doing it by taking the lives of Iraqis and Americans. It has to be stopped. What form Iraq takes is better than what is going on now and may go on for many more years. We simply cannot afford to keep fighting this war.

A Pentagon official said on NPR yesterday that we need to put a surtax on people making over $100,000 to pay for the war. My wife and I make over $100,000 and I don't want one more penny of my money to be spent killing people in Iraq.

As I have already said, Fuck Iraq, I don't give a shit what happens to Iraq.

[GoBlue]

46. Perhaps another 'catastrophic success' would enlighten you.

'Fiasco', 'folly', 'debacle', 'quagmire' ... And you don't see why we should give Iraq back to the Iraqis?

[ConsAreLiars]

47. Making enemies of Iraq's people was dumb, Training them in retaliation

methods and tactics is Really Stupid.

Unless chaos and perpetual war is the goal, of course.

As long as PNACers control the military in Iraq, Iraq IS controlled by "warlords and thugs, Zealots and nationalists." Iraqi's like people everywhere, seem to prefer to choose their own warlords, and generally don't like invaders and the occupation.

(edit grammar)

[Disturbed]

63. Part of thge Bush Regime Agenda has been accomplished.

Bush Regime Iraq Successes

1. Saddam will no longer sell Iraqi oil via the Euro.

2, A military foothold in the ME. Other than Saudi Arabia.

3, No countries will be able to buy Iraqi oil that the U.S. disapproves of.

4. The Multi-Intl. Oil Corps are reaping great profits, esp. Bush Junta fave ally Saudi Dicktatorshit.

Now the Bush Regime is merely trying to save face and prolong the War Profiteering of their backers, the Multi-Natls.

Stop the illegal U.S. Occupation now!!!

[bpilgrim]

50. it's already in the hands of "warlords and thugs, Zealots and nationalists

that's the plan... the more chaos & unknown, knowns, the better, according to rummy.

i wonder how long the arrogant 'we gotta prop'm up' argument can last?

how many more must die for a lie :shrug:

tragically, probably all :nuke:

peace

[Q]

53. Actually...lying a nation into war IS an impeachable offense...

...and staying in Iraq under the present circumstances is an ongoing war crime.

Meanwhile...I would suggest that anyone who thinks we should STAY in Iraq head off immediately to the nearest recruitment office and put their own body on the line.

And few are saying that we should just LEAVE Iraq without a plan to keep the peace. But this particular job can't be done by an invading and occupying force.

[Perky]

56. Oh I beg to differ

Most people here are saying preciesly that... Pull out tomorrow...and let the Iraquie sort it out. That is the luncy of the this side,

[cmd]

55. We have to leave, but your conclusion is not the only one

Bush has to go to the UN, admit that he was wrong and ask for help. We then have to pay for that help. You are right that it is our responsiblity, but we can never pay back Iraq by staying the wrong course.

[Perky]

57. That would be a huge step in the right direction

But you and I both know Bush is incapable of admitting failure.

[cmd]

74. Since we both know that,

then deep down you know that we have to leave. There is no use in staying. We are only making the situation worse.

[Perky]

78. I am just sayint It may get far worse if we leave.

I would love to pack it in. I have no great heartstring for the people in Iraq.... but the bedlam created when we leave is liekey to be far worse dor the US in the longer run.

[cmd]

86. I'm sure you are right about that

It would be bad at first. But I think Iraq will be better in the long run if we leave now. It is up to the Iraqis to decide what will become of their country. I can see them rejoicing when we leave, then working together to bring back law and order. The Iraqis are an educated people. We cannot forget that. Saddam did a lot of bad stuff, but he did value education.

[Junkdrawer]

59. Our dilemma in Iraq is like the alcoholic's dilemma…

When an alcoholic quits drinking, life doesn't become immediately easier. And I’m not just talking about withdrawal. It takes years of abstinence and hard work to rebuild a life shattered by alcohol. The truth is that on any given day, a drunk will feel better if they drink than if they don’t drink.

And so it is with Iraq. The day we leave Iraq will be so much worse for Iraqis than if we had stayed. However, Iraq will NEVER recover until we leave. Just like the life of an active alcoholic, it will continue to get worse.

Occupation is a progressive disease.

[DemonFighterLives]

61. Preposterous

It sounds all good, but in reality it will not work. We are the cause of the turmoil. Once the agitation is removed the festering hole will begin to heal.
If I were callous, I would say, I don't care what happens to Iraq afterwords. It cannot be any worse than the uncaring policies now in place.
We will have an enormous amount of fix-up. Basically we need to empty dubbys and cheneys assets and any other criminals like Kenny Boy and pay them off.

:hide:

[Walt Starr]

65. I once thought that way

I no longer do.

Bring them home now. All of them. Every last one of them.

[DistressedAmerican]

71. Bullshit. Not Even Bothering To Debunk This Nonsense!

Get a brain or go fight it yourself.

US OUT OF IRAQ NOW!

[sendero]

87. You know what..

... we are not accomplishing a damn thing in Iraq. We can stay for 10 years, it will merely delay the inevitable, which is in fact full fledged civil war.

This was ordained the day we sent the first troop in. There isn't jack-shit we can do about it now, but we can stay there and let the last man to die for a mistake be the 30,000th instead of the 2,000th.

[Perky]

92. If it was just civi wat I would say pull out

But its not and that was never my core argument. Its the rise of the Madras in the ghetto of Sadr city and the warring factions of Islamic Identity that has the real potential to spill out through out the middle east.
WHen Depsotic and charismatic leader emerge and incite revoutionaries in Ridayh and Jiddah we will rue the day we left left.

[sendero]

93. It doesn't matter what it is..

... our staying there isn't going to help, and it likely to merely make it worse.

[sintax]

89. Bullshit Squared- Who's WE?

I think it is then your duty to go to Iraq. You say WE HAVE TO STAY and yet you, I assume, are not there. So why not go and find out first hand about who WANTS TO STAY and WHO WANTS WHO TO LEAVE.

I also think that all those who think "WE" should stay should be having money taken directly out of their checks to pay for the thing. And the rest of us then don't have to pay.

These are hair-trigger times with well-manicured barbarians holding their finger on the button.

"To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it - please try to believe me - unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop.  Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, "regretted," that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these "little measures" that no "patriotic German" could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing.  One day it is over his head.

[stevietheman]

90. Before the Downing Street Memos became available...

I would have agreed with you.

However, since May, we have incontrovertible evidence the entirety of this war was illegal.

For the sake of the troops and posterity, pull them all out as soon as possible.

I trust that Iraq can handle its own affairs, even if broken up, from now going forward. This will happen mainly because Iran will want it this way.

Let Iran virtually annex the Shiite areas of Iraq. Let the Kurds have their own country. And let the remaining Sunni duke it out for control of the rest. It's all fine with me, as Iraq is/was a ridiculous composite of a country anyway.

The best way to make the Bush administration to pay for their mistake is to compel them to withdraw all forces now. And this episode will give future Presidents more pause before committing our troops to future actions. And this is a Good Thing!

[Astarho]

91. It was lost the moment it started

The longer we stay means only more dead Americans and dead Iraqis.

As long as we are there, any government will be seen as illegitimate and will be torn down the instant no more American guns are there to protect it.

We should leave now.

[NoSheep]

94. Okay. You wanna stay? You have to GO there first in order to stay!

:-(

[Zorra]

100. Well then, you really and truly should be on the front lines already

if that is what you believe.

Enlist if you really believe this occupation in attempt of conquest is worthwhile.

And, oh, yeah, please use your own funds to pay for your trip and your supplies, etc., OK?

I don't want to pay for this bullshit war started by a court installed lying lunatic.

[gee double you bee]

101. www.goarmy.com

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

102. We must "pick up the white man's burden.." and bring the glories

of capitalism, the free market, Walmart, McDonalds, and...oh, yeah, democracy, to the benighted lesser races.

Oops..wrong century? Wrong empire? Sorry, it's been done before..with the same results.

[wildwww2]

103. It is so easy to leave. And it is not ours to take. The Native Americans

fought to keep America from the mostly white folk who are ruining it now. They lost. Bu$h Inc. will lose. Because the Middle Eastern people will not be exterminated like the American Indians. Even though that is what alot of Americans may want. It will never happen even if Bu$h Inc. destroys our whole military trying. People like Cindy Sheehan and myself can see that this is a hopeless bloody mess that cannot be won. And saying that we cannot leave because of who will take over after we leave means nothing. It will never be ours to take. The American Indians who are left in this country have a better chance of kicking all of the rest of us out. Than Bu$h Inc. and his idiot allies have at any kind of win in Iraq. So why waste our childrens blood? Corporate profits in the name of Jesus Christ? We still get our asses kicked.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[eridani]

104. How exactly are we helping?

Iraq is already an impoverished state with the Shi'ite dominated government making nice with Iran. The Kurds already consider themselves independent.