Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Strategic redeployment - this is the Democrat plan?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:25 PM
Original message
Strategic redeployment - this is the Democrat plan?
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/02/20/democrats_may_unite_on_plan_to_pull_troops/

WASHINGTON -- After months of trying unsuccessfully to develop a common message on the war in Iraq, Democratic Party leaders are beginning to coalesce around a broad plan to begin a quick withdrawal of US troops and install them elsewhere in the region, where they could respond to emergencies in Iraq and help fight terrorism in other countries.

The concept, dubbed ''strategic redeployment," is outlined in a slim, nine-page report coauthored by a former Reagan administration assistant Defense secretary, Lawrence J. Korb, in the fall. It sets a goal of a phased troop withdrawal that would take nearly all US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2007, although many Democrats disagree on whether troop draw-downs should be tied to a timeline...."


So let me get this straight - our plan is to pull our troops from Iraq - but not all of them - and to redeploy them around the region? Where exactly are we going to deploy them? Saudi Arabia? Kuwait? Turkey? Iran? Um, isn't the presence of American troops in the holy land of Saudi Arabia what provoked Bin Laden? He didn't give two shits about us going into Iraq, he hated Saddam just as much as we did. It wasn't until "infidel" troops set up camp in Islam's holiest land that he became incensed.

Does anyone really think that a "strategic redeployment" is really the correct answer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Burning Water Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Not me.
I'm with you on this one. This is a bad idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. People want true alternatives - not just GOP-lite
Which I'm afraid is what this plan looks like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. That's the Murtha Plan
The Kerry plan was to bring them home by the end of the year. In 2004, his plan was to start bringing the majority home in 2005. He just wrote another letter pressing Bush to announce there would be no permanent bases in Iraq.

This is the problem, there's the Murtha Plan, the Hillary stay the course plan, the Kerry bring them all the way home plan.

That's why the Dem Party has been silent on Iraq. Again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Exactly!
I haven't read the plan yet, but I hope it's close to Murtha's plan.

I used to support Kerry's plan, until I realized that just our presence there was making the problem worse. Murtha is also probably the most well-informed Congressman on military matters, so I was ecstatic when he came out in favor of "over the horizon" redeployment ASAP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. What's the difference?
If you build permanent bases in the middle of the Iraqi desert, is that really much different than building those same bases just across the border in Saudi Arabia? I respect Murtha, and agree that we need to pull our troops out of Iraq - I just don't like the idea of sticking them right across the border or leaving them in the region.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Disengagement
That's key to his plan. Stop sending our troops out on missions because it's just fueling the insurgency, that was the "terrorize" comment that they chose to distort. Start bringing serious numbers of our troops home, stop sending them out on missions, have them tighten up the borders to keep outside forces out. Diffuse the situation and then bring our troops all the way home.

It's much better than the "over the horizon" permanent military in the ME plan.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. You both have it wrong - this is a 2yr Korb plan - Murtha's was redeploy
Edited on Mon Feb-20-06 05:08 PM by blm
POSSIBLY within 6mo. Kerry's was a significant drawdown by end of 2006 not just drawback.

Korb's was a redeploy arounfd the region within a 2yr period. Korb's is an extended version of Murtha's. Kerry's is a pull out over a year with significant drawdowns quickly - like after the election last December - to demonstrate right off the bat that we have no intention of staying. He wanted NO PERMANENT BASES and the ones built already to be turned over to the Iraqis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. And not one mention of Kerry's plan or the fact that
Edited on Mon Feb-20-06 05:29 PM by ProSense
he wrote to Pace requesting they make a public statement about no permanent bases.

And you're right blm, Murtha's plan is based on Korb's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I like the 'bring them home' plan
Honestly, what difference does it really make if you have permanent bases inside of Iraq as opposed to permanent bases just a few hundred miles away in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. None that I can see
Just spread the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-20-06 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
11. At least it would get the guards and reserves home right away.
That is part of the plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC