Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

If you ask any person in America of Middle-Eastern descent they will say Saddam had to go. He was brutal and damaging to his country and his genocidal rage is something we unfortunately see too often. If our leadership can sit down and truely think of a way to reorganize Iraq instead of saying “we’ll be out in June” it will lead to a better country.

In reality though, America economically was not and still is not ready for dealing with Iraq. Even more so, we were lied to about the reasons to go to Iraq and the Bush administration has really backed itself into a corner. That corner is due to the timetable, a very lose one, that has been given to the public.

In all actuality, to make sure Iraq stays as a secular and organized state, troops will be there well past the election. However, if troops are pulled out too soon everything could fall apart and severe infighting among the Iraqis would occur ripping the fragile nation apart. So what do we do?

Americans want their troops out of Iraq so that the death toll does not keep rising but taking them out prematurely could cause even more trouble than before. Several stop-laws have taken place and are now in action preventing troops from serving their contractual amount of time to serve before being rotated and more and more are being sent in. The only way to make things easier is to have the UN get involved; yet, Bush does not want that and aparently neither does half the country.

It will be very interesting to see what Bush does and if he can make more people switch over like the author of the article did.

Great topical reference, Matthew. Americans are having just such a debate and review of whether our incursion into Iraq will be worth the cost to Americans. Turki provides what appears to be an honest and forthright assessment from his vantage point. It is commendable.

His following quote however, I find disturbing:

Look, I have no illusions about the shenanigans and hypocrisies of a big power like the US, including its neocon ideologues, who are more cons than neos. Lest we forget, at the height of Saddam’s bloody reach in the1980 s, which saw the Halabja atrocities, Washington not only uttered nary a word of criticism of the Iraqi leader, let alone called for his overthrow, but provided him with political, military and economic assistance that, in effect, underwrote his survival and made possible the very repression that American officials now claim they want to banish forever from the land.

Pres. Bush is now proping up and sending American tax dollars to another “Saddam Hussein” in the region, as if he has no memory or history whatsoever in his head. I am speaking of our aid to Our Man in Baku ILHAM ALIYEV.

My take on the situation in Iraq is a no win situation for President Bush. If we pull out prematurely, civil war will almost be inevitable, and then the Iraqi people will be no better off, and many will be worse off. If we remain, taking the hits on our personnel and expensive equipment (5 helicopters destroyed this month alone), Bush is going to be hard pressed to defend the deficits which the Congressional Budget Office now projects (with continued occupation of Iraq) as a 2.4 Trillion dollar addition to our national debt over the next 10 years. Quote: “The budget office projected that for the decade ending in 2013, the red ink will total $2.38 trillion. That was $986 billion worse than it projected in August and $3.7 trillion deeper than it projected only a year ago.”

The invasion into Iraq may end up being better than the Hussein regime, or not, but it could just as easily be one of the worst decisions made for the American people 10 years from now. The parallels with Viet Nam are piling up pretty fast. If Bush is unable get the U.N. to take the hits we are now taking, Britain’s people may likely pull out next year, and the issue of how to exit Iraq while saving face to the world becomes solutionless.

What Adam said about being “out by June” is interesting. I’ve wondered for a while now if the war in Iraq and subsequent actions and timetables are being choreographed with the election in mind? Is there much proof to back this up or am I being overly cynical?

I agree with the most of what David said, but do you really think the UK would pull its troops out prematurely, what gave you that idea? I reckon this is pretty unlikely. Blair will certainly see out this coming week, which will be tough for him, but he’s steadfast in his convictions and will not likely leave Iraq before it’s complete.

To be honest, I do think it is timed for the election. June seems to be at a time where people will still say we got rid of Saddam but forget all the trouble we went though to do it.

At that point, if things fall apart in Iraq it is either the new guy’s fault, or an excuse for Bush - assuming he gets reelected - to go back and attack Syria, Iran, etc.

Bob, a very large segment of the British public (sorry, don’t have the polls readily accessible) do not believe invasion of Iraq was in their best interest. If Blair fails this week in this confidence test, his political opponent candidates will use withdrawing from Iraq as a platform for replacing Blair. If they win, the British will pull out of “Bush’s war”.

Bob, found some poll results:
Blair should quit states “A YouGov poll for The Mail on Sunday showed that the revelations thrown up by the Hutton Inquiry, set up after Kelly’s apparent suicide, have damaged Blair, with 43 per cent of voters believing he should quit, compared with 37 per cent before the hearing opened.

A total of 42 per cent believed he should stay in office while 15 per cent were unsure.”

Two-thirds of British feel Blair misled them over Iraq war states: LONDON (AFP) Jul 14, 2003
Two thirds of British voters feel Prime Minister Tony Blair misled them over the case for launching a war in Iraq, according to a poll in the Daily Mirror newspaper Monday.

One, the guy is still saying that our foreign policy sucks eggs through garden hoses.

Two, he’s presenting it as a accidental benefit of that terrible foreign policy

Three, the guy seems to be fairly moderate. Does he represent the views of many in his region, or is he a voice in the wilderness?

I think that it is true that the American people were misled about the reasons to going to war. However, a cruel and inhumane dictator was removed in the process. I think that the way that the situation has unfolded will not help out in the next election.
I agree that troops need to stay in Iraq for quite some time in order to give them a chance in becoming a somewhat stable country. I as much as anyone would like to see our troops come home, but this would comprimise all that was done in previous war and rebuilding efforts.