Cut and Run: Can They Get Away With It?

[Beetwasher]

I think it's becoming obvious that the strategy in Iraq is going to be to cut and run from Iraq, probably sometime in the middle of next year. They're going to slap together a provisional gov't of handpicked US puppets, throw together a constitution and leave the country in shambles under the "protection" of a rag-tag Iraqi security force.

The question is, will they be able to spin this and convince enough people that it's really a victory and not a retreat? Will they be able to convince people that it's "mission accomplished"?

[pfitz59]

1. Declare victory and go home!

They own the media! Sure it can work! Victory parades for everyone!

[Zero Gravitas]

2. Yes

They can absolutely get away with it. Declare Total Victory and go home. The know-nothing Bush supporters wil believe it and praise their Great Leader For His Decisive Victory Over Turruh. By the time it all goes to shit in a civil war, the election will be over, and they won't care anyway because it will be non-white, non-Chrisitan, non-American nobodies doing the dying.

[Atman]

3. A rather lengthy answer

I posted this earlier this morning....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=702952

[Beetwasher]

12. We're Exactly of the Same Mind on This

Great post.

"Make no mistake; this is the most disgusting, cynical act I've seen in months, from the most disgusting, cynical president ever to soil the White House.

So, it is time to call a spade a spade...

Bush is beating feet. He is retreating. BUSH HAS BEEN BEATEN and he is attempting to turn it into yet another campaign event. It is absolutely disgraceful."

Yup, That about sums it up. Call a devastating defeat and retreat a magnificent victory and give yourself a medal.

The question is, who will call him on this?

[caledesi]

25. Just read your post. Excellent! We need a retaliation plan for this. nt

[omshanti]

4. They'll wait till just before the election.

then, watch for the next Aircraft Carrier stunt.

[Cha]

5. But can "they spin" another "war" after

that? Isn't that what this pnac group is all about? And if they "cut and run" then they can't have the oil. Too bad.

[nostamj]

6. they did it in Afghanistan.....

nobody much noticed the chaos we left there.

[bryant69]

8. I don't know if the Afghanistan model works

I think if we had "gotten" Saddam Hussein, well, than we might be able to cut and run without consequence. As it is, well, the true believer will follow Bush anywhere but those in the middle won't.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Zero Gravitas]

9. We didn't get bin Laden or Mullah Omah

yet we cut & ran from Afghanistan.

[HFishbine]

13. Have we withdrawn from Afghanistan?

???

[Spazito]

18. NATO is now in charge of Afghanistan (actually only Kabul)...

the number of US troops has been greatly reduced but not totally withdrawn. There are German, Canadian, etc, troops there but only to protect Kabul, there aren't enough troops to secure all of Afghanistan.

[Wickerman]

7. It won't be a total withdrawal

need to keep enough troops there so that pesky media (you the honest ones - must be three or four of them left) can't report on what a mess Iraq really is.

[bushisanidiot]

10. You Think They'll Leave Halliburton Over There To Defend Themselves?

I don't think so.. I think the plan is to own Iraq and it's oil at any cost (US tax payers).

[WindRavenX]

11. Of course they can

This administration has a spin machine that can spin anything to be a positive.
BTW, W- Where's Osama? Where's Saddam? Where's my JOB?
This must be our mantra.

[tom_paine]

14. With the Right-Wing Sub-Media & Corporate TV Pravda

They could successfully convince 70% of the Imperial Subjects that 1 + 1 = 3...

[Walt Starr]

15. The Fundamentalist Revolution will happen before November

The cut and run will have to be an October surprise in order for it to work. The provisional puppet government would be overthrown by radical fundamentalists within weeks of the U.S. leaving.

[NoKingGeorge]

16. What about the bounty...

How could Cheney cut and run? Many folks here and around the world beleive this was an oil grab. Sounds like your rationalizing is based on a beleif in the 'we went to liberate' BS.

[Atman]

19. Halliburton contracts are secure

You can be sure Halliburton has insurance on the contracts. Anyway, they will most likely remain behind, with a contingent of our taxpayer-funded military to guard them. Count on it.

It is still about the oil. But they thought they could pull this liberation shit on us because it would be so easy. A "cake walk" one might say. It made an easy ruse. But now it isn't working out, so they'll skip the cake walk and just focus on the oil.

No inconsistency or rationalizing about it.

[Beetwasher]

20. Cost Benefit Analysis

It may or may not be a total cut and run.

They may have decided the cost to obtain the Iraqi oil is not worth losing an election.

They may finish a few fortified military bases around some oil refineries and oil fields and retreat behind those walls.

Of course we didn't go to liberate. But there comes a time when even the most greedy scumbags have to take what they can and split. They've already sucked billions out of the treasury, they may have decided that that's enough...for now. They can always invade again...

[Cha]

17. I wonder if sadam will ever make a

comeback?

[eleny]

21. The world is watching

So they can't treat Americans like mushrooms - You know, keep us in the dark and feed us poop. The truth can and will come out about the wake they leave behind them and the fundamentalist tsunami when it occurs.

I'd be prepared for fuel shortages or prices to go sky high. Maybe I'm off base about energy shortages. But I'm glad that we don't drive much any more.

[Jacobin]

22. Regardless of who is in the WH

We are either going to have to cut and run (we are infidels invading and occupying a muslim country) or be run out as in Vietnam. It has been this way for 2,000 years and a significant element of their culture and shared history is repelling occupying invaders.

This is why Bush the First didn't go to Baghdad. This is what 10 op-ed pieces in the NYT before the invasion by former Bush the First heavies said. It is not going to work. It's not possible to accomplish. Foisting "democracy" on this nation is silly and muddle-headed. It doesn't matter how many well-meaning Western nations deploy troops. It's an occupation by infidels.

Smirky has kicked over a hornets nest of massive proportions and no good will come of this for anyone. He is a stupid idealogue with PNACers driving the train to steal oil and make Israel feel invincible.

It was doomed from the start and its going to get bloodier and messier.

[ewagner]

23. This may get a little long.......

but........

The way I see it is that the only viable option for Bu$h and company is to install a kinder and gentler Saddam with a thousand points of light armed to the teeth.

Chalabi is a likely candidate although his ascention to the throne would hasten a fundamentalist revolt (which will probably take place under any circumstances) but rest assured whoever Bremer picks will have enough money to finance his own army (remember there are approximately 400,000 unemployed Iraqi troops who need a paycheck.) and conduct wholesale slaughters of the opposition. The difference between these slaughters and Saddam's slaughters will be that they are done for "Iraqi Freedom". (Freedom Slaughters anyone?)

Saddam was troublesome only because he wouldn't play ball with Bu$hco. I don't think either Dubya or his Father gave a damn about the killing of Kurds and Shi'ites as long as their interests were protected. Similarily, they won't give a damn about the slaughter of more as long as the instigator protects the American financial interests in Iraq.

They could spin this any way they wanted. (e.g.:Headline: Democratic Administration puts down Revolt.) They have the money to do it. Remember, the $87 Billion isn't needed until next Spring and Congress foolishly gave Bu$h the authority to move the money around anyway he wants.

I suspect Bremer is going back to pick a leader to install under some kind of cover that the leader will be "representative" of the "new Iraq". Look for formal "transition ceremonies" within six months.

[Beetwasher]

24. I Expect Massive Amounts of Unprecedented Propoganda

The likes of which will make the propoganda we've already seen seem like the truth in comparison. I only hope someone, perhaps some of our new Billionaire friends can counter that propoganda.

[starroute]

26. October Surprises and Black Box Voting

I got a flash the other day of how these two things could be linked:

If the voting can be rigged, a withdrawal from Iraq (or any other October Surprise) doesn't actually have to win over voters. It just has to provide a plausible cover story to explain why the vote tallies are so different from the pre-election polls.

That's the combination I expect to see coming into play in November 2004.

[Beetwasher]

28. Yup, you got it

They only need a good cover story...

[kentuck]

27. But don't we want our troops out of Iraq ??

Won't Bush say he is only doing what the people want?

[Beetwasher]

29. Yes and No

I suspect on one hand they will say "Well, isn't this what you whiny Democrats wanted?" but they'll also way "We accomplished everything we wanted to do, that's why we're leaving!"

Yes, we want our troops out, but there's a right way and a wrong way to do it. Unfortunately, we owe the Iraqi people some sort of compensation and security because the mess that is OUR fault. If we are to withdraw, it should be done correctly, with REAL solutions in place to make sure the country doesn't dissolve into a dangerous, bloody, chaotic mess. You and I both know that when Bush pulls out, it's going to be done incorrectly...