General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2179567

    The US needs to find a new solution for Iraq and soon!!!

    Locked

    by sleepin’dawg ·

    The Democrats and Republicans are at cross purposes about what to do now in
    Iraq . The Democrats want an immediate retreat and the
    Republicans are beating the drum to “stay the course.” Regardless
    of whichever course, America won’t be safe from Islamic terrorism.

    Republicans say that, withdrawal at this time would be perceived
    by the Islamic fundamentalists as a major defeat of the West and draw
    more recruits to their cause. The Democrats for their part have noted, staying
    our current course– has no standard of victory and no clear
    intent of protecting America from Islamic terrorism and is a disaster
    that has resulted in the death of two thousand Americans.

    It is time to pursue an objective of victory rather than giving into defeat.

    We must define and pusue war objectives that protect the American
    people from Islamic terrorism, and then execute those objectives by
    any means necessary. Above all, why make it our objective, to
    bring the good life to every corner of the Middle East. We must remove
    the terrorist threat from the Middle Eastern states –which means
    that we must put an end to state sponsored terrorism.

    In Iraq, the insurgency must be crushed immediately–which very well may
    include choking off its backers, Iran and Syria. Let the Iraqis themselves
    take on the responsibility of establishing their own government.
    Once the Iraq insurgency is crushed the priority should
    be given to eliminating the regime that is the greatest terrorist and
    nuclear threat to the United States in the Middle East: Iran. Such a
    policy would serve as a death blow to bin Laden, al-Zarqawi and the
    rest of the fundamentalists, who attract their recruits with the hope
    that America can be defeated.

    [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #3123277

      Iran and al Qa’ida

      by john.a.wills ·

      In reply to The US needs to find a new solution for Iraq and soon!!!

      Al Qa’ida is Sunni. Iran is Shia. That is why Iran has no objection to the democratization of Iraq, which has a majority-Shia population.

    • #3123211

      America will never be safe

      by av . ·

      In reply to The US needs to find a new solution for Iraq and soon!!!

      America will never be safe from Islamic fundamentalists, regardless of what we do in Iraq. They attacked us before we were ever in Iraq. They hate our way of life.

      Most Dems do not want immediate withdrawal, but John Murtha, a democratic representative who is a Vietnam veteran that supposedly has the ear of the commanders on the ground in Iraq, does. Possibly, he speaks for them. Murtha is well respected by both parties, so his concerns have resulted in a long overdue debate about what we are going to do in Iraq aside from “stay the course.”

      Even though we’d all love to leave Iraq now, we can’t do it until the Iraqis can defend themselves and after the December elections. Our government will probably decrease the numbers of troops substantially over the next year.

      There is no victory for us to win in Iraq. It is up to the Iraqis. Its their country. We need to get out of there as quickly as possible and take care of the needs of America. America is falling apart.

      • #3123206

        Murtha voted against himself

        by maxwell edison ·

        In reply to America will never be safe

        .
        Murtha called for an immediate withdraw, but when a vote was forced on the question, he voted against it.

        So it begs the question, was he playing politics when he called for an immediate withdraw, or was he playing politics when he voted against one the very next day?

        • #3127778

          Maybe he was misquoted

          by puppybreath ·

          In reply to Murtha voted against himself

          I heard his latest statement to the press was, “I know you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”

        • #3127767

          Yes, something like that

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Maybe he was misquoted

          .
          whatever it was.

        • #3128649

          I think he said what he did out of frustration

          by av . ·

          In reply to Murtha voted against himself

          I don’t see him as a political game player, but as someone that is frustrated by the slow progress in Iraq, loss of life and no end in sight.

          He’s a military man and I’m sure he knows that it isn’t possible to pull out immediately. He did a good thing though because he started a national debate on exactly where we are at right now.

        • #3128638

          I think he’s forgotten about military history

          by road-dog ·

          In reply to I think he said what he did out of frustration

          if what you say is true. That is a charitable assessment, and here’s why. War takes time and costs lives. This may sound like oversimplification, but it bears reiteration if he desires that we withdraw.

          He is a war vet. He should know better. He should know that the opposition sees dissent as weakness. Just as his veteran status makes his opinion carry more weight than others’; I think it means that we should also expect him to hold himself to a higher standard as well.

          With this in mind, I cannot help but believe that his position is based on political concerns rather than a frustration with the process.

          What is being done in Iraq is a deadly and costly business. One only need to look at Japan and Germany to decide if the goal is attainable or worthwhile.

        • #3128629

          What bothers me is that

          by av . ·

          In reply to I think he’s forgotten about military history

          he is such an unlikely person to take a stand like that. I don’t think he has ever done anything but support the war. I’m going with that he is man of integrity and he has the respect and ear of the commanders on the ground. I think Bush and Cheney, who supposedly is a friend of his, also share that view of him.

          It makes me wonder if we all know the real truth about how successful we can be in Iraq.

        • #3128470

          Why put his status above that of, say…..

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to What bothers me is that

          .
          ….John McCain?

          McCain never has, and never would, do such a thing. He’s not a cut-and-run kinda’ guy. In fact, he’s even suggested that MORE troops be sent, not fewer. And he and GWB aren’t exactly buddies.

          Why does Murtha’s military standing, in your eyes, trump McCains?

        • #3129395

          I think they’re both fine men

          by av . ·

          In reply to Why put his status above that of, say…..

          I am just bothered by the fact that a military man like Murtha would suggest getting out immediately. It seems out of character for him and it makes me wonder what information would compel him to take the stand that he did and did the information come from the commanders on the ground.

      • #3123187

        Victory in Iraq IS victory in Iran

        by road-dog ·

        In reply to America will never be safe

        I believe that the example of a functioning democracy in Iraq will sound the death knell for the opressive theocracies in Iran and our pseudo-ally Saudi Arabia. I remain optimistic that the wave of democracy that changed Europe following the US’s revolutionary war will repeat itself in the middle east.

        This is a costly but worthwhile endeavor, as there is no sociologically pernicious virus like freedom.

        Iran is low hanging fruit due to youthful Iranians who are already tired of the opression of the revolution that overthrew the Shah a generation ago. What they need is an example of what life could be like given freedom to create their own futures.

        The Saudis have already had to begin liberalization in the last couple of years. This was the nation that spawned Osama bin Ladin and most of the 911 terrorists. Trying to take back those reforms is like putting toothpaste back into the tube.

        These regimes desire to aim their disaffected youth at an external enemy, blaming the US for the ills created by their own self defeating belief systems. This won’t wash with a population that has a true opportunity to form their own opinions and to give their children a better life than they have.

        The war against terror is a classic clash of cultures. Either they will change ours or we will change theirs. We cannot co-exist with them, as history has shown. Taking the fight to the root cause of terrorism is the underlying genius of the Bush doctrine. Taking out Saddam Hussein made for an easier transition to democracy than would be the case in either Iran or Saudi Arabia. The rest of the middle east will follow as France once followed the United States.

        Many individuals in the world don’t see the long-term objectives in play here. Many nations around the world oppose this effort because it runs counter to their economic interests. One could take both of these oppositions as each making his own way in the world.

        Many politicians in the US oppose this effort because it is politically expedient to do so, as victory in this effort is a victory for the opposing party. This is the basest of motivations. This is demonstrated by the dissonance between what they say and the way they vote.

        • #3127764

          Welcome back, road-dog

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Victory in Iraq IS victory in Iran

          .
          Your absence did not go unnoticed. Glad to see you still around and kicking.

        • #3127760

          Been a while

          by road-dog ·

          In reply to Welcome back, road-dog

          Yes indeed

        • #3128635

          Iran is a long way off

          by av . ·

          In reply to Victory in Iraq IS victory in Iran

          It will take at least 5 more years for Iraq to become a stable democracy, if they choose to remain a democracy after we leave. It could easily become a theocracy because of the many powerful clerics in that country. I’m not sure the Iraqi’s are capable of sustaining a democracy without the US presence there.

          Iran is another story. There is alot of opposition there, true, but they have a long way to go. The newly elected government is not a good sign.

          We will always be fighting the war on terror, abroad. I just don’t see why this is just America’s problem and not a problem for all civilized nations. If we really were serious about fighting the war on terror, we would secure our borders and inspect all cargo coming into this country. Why hasn’t Bush done this? We’re looking overseas for terrorists and they’re here, waiting.

          It looks good on paper, but the Bush doctrine for spreading democracy to the middle east is paved with an endless supply of American blood and money. I still don’t see how we will all be safer in the end. Its an idealistic dream.

          Enough already. We need to concentrate on America. We have alot of pressing problems. How can we claim to rebuild the middle east when we can’t even take care of our own country. Our response to Hurricane Katrina was pathetic. We will be facing more of the same in the future and we are not prepared.

          How can we say we can rebuild another nation when our own nation is falling apart?

        • #3128613

          I’m optimistic domestically too

          by road-dog ·

          In reply to Iran is a long way off

          Although I agree with you about the Republican’s abject failure to handle the border security issue. Eventually a wall will be going up once the government sprouts balls and quits pandering to the hispanic voting block.I think the groundswell of public opinion will bring this problem to the forefront before too long. I agree also that FEMA dropped the ball hard in the wake of Katrina. Heads did roll.

          However, (you knew this was coming, didn’t you)
          I don’t think this nation is falling apart.

          To be quite honest, I’m beginning to wonder if Americans believe their good old Uncle Sam’s job is to totally fix everything after mother nature puts her foot down. If so, that is the area where we are falling apart. This country was created by folks who would plant their feet and lock their knees in times of trouble. Now it appears that people feel like this nation should guarantee us all a secure existence and has failed us when our lives and livelihoods are disrupted.

          As for Iraq and Iran, I stand by my assertions. Time will tell if you or I am correct. Personally, I think the only way we can lose is to quit.

          Additionally, if the problem is an indefinite expenditure of blood and money, then the same problem will exist if we leave Iraq. The terrorists aren’t going away.

          To deal with mosquitos, you can spray every day and lock yourself in your house. Or you can drain the swamp and deprive them of their ability to lay eggs.

          Except in billiards, the best defense is a good offense.

          A big complaint of opposers of our actions is that Iraq is attracting terrorists. Personally, I’d rather they congregate there than in NYC. At least we have troops there.

          We’re not going to be able to patrol every mile of border or coastline. Ever. Nor are we ever going to be able to inspect every shipping container. I’ve been to Port Canaveral. It’s not a big port and literally thousands of containers come in every day. Thats one port, and not a particularly large one of many.

          Think of it this way, a city has a problem with gangs. Do the police station a cop in front of every home? no, that’s too manpower intensive. Instead, they look for the bad guys and take them on where they congregate. Better on offense than on defense.

    • #3127774

      America is to Iraq…

      by jessie ·

      In reply to The US needs to find a new solution for Iraq and soon!!!

      …what my in-laws are to Thanksgiving dinner… the meal is over… why don’t ya’ll leave?

      We really need to get out of there. We’ve “trained” the Iraqi army. We’ve given them supplies, and now, they’ve asked us to leave (several times) so why aren’t we gone yet?

      • #3127715

        A legacy of Viet Nam?

        by neilb@uk ·

        In reply to America is to Iraq…

        I think that the idea is not to leave until it’s obvious that the US withdrawal is, in no way whatsoever, interpretable as a “defeat”. You have to be seen to leave in good order [b]after[/b] the insurgents have been suppressed else the Islamists will use it as more propaganda. “See, the Great Satan can be defeated by the Will of Allah and the Lives of Our Martyrs” – or some similar crap.

        Call me cynical, but I bet, deep-down, our leaders are regretting going in and wishing that SH was still in power with Iran as his target and Iran’s nuclear programme as the bulls-eye.

        Neil

        • #3127692

          No matter WHAT we do

          by jessie ·

          In reply to A legacy of Viet Nam?

          … at this point, the insurgents are going to use it as propaganda. Whether it’s “They’ve run like cowards. We defeated them.” or “They will not leave our oppressed brothers alone to enjoy the freedoms they have themselves.” it’s all useable propaganda and I’m sure either way, they’re having no problems with recruiting.

          At this point, I am only selfishly interested in saving as many American lives as possible. I don’t think the Islamist extremists will think any better of us if we go or if we stay and therefore, it will not cost us more American lives from terrorism than would already be lost, if we pull out of Iraq.

      • #3128653

        Uh, no. and here’s why

        by road-dog ·

        In reply to America is to Iraq…

        In the last couple of weeks, just after the “Murtha” vote, the interim leader of Iraq specifically stated that pulling out was not desired by his government. This may change when the permanent government is elected a few weeks from now. If thay decide to as us to leave, then we must pull out, otherwise we are no longer liberators but occupyers.

        As for training Iraqi forces, ther is a lot more to it than fundamentals training, stocking the fridge, and bailing.

        The job of training middle easteners in modern military tactics and strategies is daunting. This is a cultural thing. Arabs would rather not play than lose, so true force on force training is difficult. That is why arab forces are typically so inept. Israeli forces have proven this again and again.

        Also, a instilling discipline that overrides tribal urges for domination and payback takes time and effort. We must overcome feuds that have festered for centuries.
        This is essential because the many ethnic and religious minorities will quickly lose confidence in a military that “looks the other way” when they are victimized. This is the ooze from which civil war can fester.

        Suffice it to say, this is a difficult and dangerous job that President Bush said was going to difficult and dangerous before we went in.

        I find it amusing that many want to establish a timetable for withdrawal and telling the terrorists (note that I don’t call them an insurgency) that they only have to lay low for x number of days plus one. This is folly when looked at through the eyes of the enemy.

        It’s hard to take people seriously on their foreign policy acumen when they support a thing that is so wrong on such a simple and fundamental level.

        Even the schoolyard bully knows to behave when the teacher is looking and to strike when his back is turned…..

      • #3128619

        The Iraqis have asked us to leave? Really? Who and when?

        by maxwell edison ·

        In reply to America is to Iraq…

        .
        Will you please elaborate with names, dates, and circumstances?

    • #3128620

      The Biggest Problem with your argument

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to The US needs to find a new solution for Iraq and soon!!!

      .
      You presume that the Democrats’ objective is to do the right thing.

      Although there are probably a handful of pacifists in the Democrat party, the overall majority of them, including the party leadership, puts whatever should or should not happen with Iraq in a secondary position to their real objective, which is to regain the White House and their lost majority in Congress by discrediting President Bush and defeating him and his fellow Republicans at all costs.

      You will never convince me that the Democrats are putting principle before politics. And until people acknowledge that, finding any real bipartisan solution is about as likely as seeing a blizzard in hell.

      If the Democrats would have thrown their support behind President Bush, like the 1940s Republicans did with President Roosevelt, this would all be quite different. And, in my opinion, fewer American soldiers would have been killed.

      • #3129654

        What?

        by rageneau ·

        In reply to The Biggest Problem with your argument

        I was arguing with my friend whether Bush was a psychopath or a sociopath. I claimed he was vicarious psychopath–a serial killer that gets others do his killing. My friend disagreed, “He’s a sociopath that has little empathy for others.”

        How sad that it’s come to arguing over whether the president is a pyschopath or sociopath. I think I would be happy to have one that was just a womanizer. It’s a terrible thing when lying, invading, killing, maiming, bombing, war profiteering and torture are considered more acceptable than getting a blow job. Really, really sad. We have become the bad guys, we are the dark side.

        • #3129595

          It’s Sad to see such ignorance displayed

          by surflover ·

          In reply to What?

          of the realities of world affairs… (I’m sure Max will have something to say as well, but I couldn’t let this one pass)…

          before posting something so blatantly ignorant of the objective of the islamic terroists, the reality that Iran will have nuclear capability early next year, and their stated objective to use it on Israel and the US, you should educate yourself by studying the true facts of the region.

          The Hoover digest has published many lucid, thoroughly investigated articles explaining the situation in the region as a whole… read some of the later articles in the 2005 series at;

          http://www.hooverdigest.org/past_issues.html

          This is not about President Bush, this is about preserving our way of life… the liberal agenda is about gaining power at any expense, including the letting the terrorists regain power. It’s a shame you have been duped by their manipulation of the mainstream media.

        • #3126758

          Flamebait….

          by road-dog ·

          In reply to What?

          Incoming barrage of responses in 3,2,1….

          So… Saddam Hussein was a model citizen? Perhaps a victim? Maybe a classic case of a hapless politician who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

          Are all of us who believe this war was both just and necessary sociopaths or psychopaths also?

          The offenses you attribute to our President can be fairly laid at the feet of Saddam Hussein if you care to apply your judgement fairly.

          Obviously you and your friend have an understanding of this war and of the Clinton scandal that is at best “powerpoint deep”

          Evil flourishes when good men do nothing. Doing something about evil is a just cause. You might want to reconsider whether or not you are on the dark side. To choose not to do something about evil is evil.

    • #3120639

      sleepin’dawg – you surprise me

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to The US needs to find a new solution for Iraq and soon!!!

      .
      You’ve bought into the doom-and-gloom, all is lost scare tactics put forth by the Bush-Bashers.

      • #3120567

        Actually Max if you reread carefully you will find I haven’t bought in.

        by sleepin’dawg ·

        In reply to sleepin’dawg – you surprise me

        Far from buying into gloom and doom, I am saying that whether you agree with the war or not and I happen to agree, it is time for a more focused approach being taken to ensure victory. This is required because Iraq is needed as a staging area for the inevitable conflict which is due to arise with Iran. All other potential staging areas necessitate amphibious operations. I am not sure if the current TOE would be sufficient for this but land based operations can be launched from Iraq.

        [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

      • #3120566

        Actually Max if you reread carefully you will find I haven’t bought in.

        by sleepin’dawg ·

        In reply to sleepin’dawg – you surprise me

        Far from buying into gloom and doom, I am saying that whether you agree with the war or not and I happen to agree, it is time for a more focused approach being taken to ensure victory. This is required because Iraq is needed as a staging area for the inevitable conflict which is due to arise with Iran. All other potential staging areas necessitate amphibious operations. I am not sure if the current TOE would be sufficient for this but land based operations can be launched from Iraq.

        [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

Viewing 4 reply threads