Third Party & Independents: Archives

I have said this repeatedly. WE CANNOT LEAVE IRAQ. Unless you can guarantee that Turkey won’t invade the Kurds, Iran won’t influence the Shiates, the Kurds and Shiates declare autonomy AND Iraq does not turn into Al Queda Heaven, we cannot go. Iraq is not a no-nothing Vietnam where nobody cares if everyone dies. Iraq is the Crossroads of the Middle East. The political and military disaster of an unstable Iraq is unimaginable. Saudi Arabia could fall. Terrorists could flood into Jordan and Israel. We have a duty to make sure we get our oil!!!

While it saddens me that many have died, the Republicans are right that they did indeed volunteer to be flypaper. Our Soldiers heroism cannot be underestimated. I am certain that there will be enough Troops.

Stay in Iraq.

Good article, Mr. Martin. Gen. George Casey laid out a lengthy statement, if this, if this, if that, if that, if this, if this, THEN we will withdraw some troops.

Laughable when you read the list of ifs, in light of the current status of Iraqi stability and control. Pure political B.S.

We will be there until the American people demand withdrawal. Iraqi stability and autonomous constitutional and democratic government favorable to alliance to the US and its allies, is simply not a reality in the foreseeable future, if ever.

Remaining or leaving Iraq never did, and still does not depend on what Iraqis do. It always has, and always will be a question of when the American people lose faith in the lies and deceptions that led us into Iraq with hope and faith.

We the people of the United States will determine when we leave, just as it was we the people who determined when we left Viet Nam. Get busy leaving or keep on losing and dying in Iraq. It really is not a complicated decision, but, one which Americans will not be unified on for at least thousands of more deaths and 10’s of billions of more deficit dollars spent, I am sure.

Half this nation lives by faith, and faith is not deterred by reality or facts.

Aldous,

Your comment was an attempt at sarcasm right?

What happens if we were to pick up and leave today is a question worth asking. Whether invading was the right thing or not, whether we’ve “won” or “lost,” we should be inquiring about what would occur if our troops were home by Christmas. This should be a question asked by those on both sides of the argument. We went into this war without nearly enough forethought. Let’s not make the same mistake twice.

Read,

Now there’s the sixty-four thousand dollar question isn’t. We have created another Afghanistan in Iraq and we have an obligation to clean it up, and we can only do so by increasing troop strength and doing the job right. So, no, I am not advocating pulling out of Iraq, but admitting that we made large mistakes there and we need to clean them up. Pulling out pre-maturely with the insurgents/terrorists clearly in charge would indeed threaten our national security, not to mention that of the rest of the Western world.

Gee, do you think NATO would lend a hand now?

We’ll draw down troops in the spring regardless of the situation. It’s a function of domestic restraints; military manpower shortages, midterm elections, and economic constraints as the economic cycle works through recovery, such as it is, and the next recession.

We’ll know more tomorrow, when the Iraqi consitution is published. The real nexus will be on 10/15, when the Iraqis hold a referendum on the consitution. That outcome is highly uncertain.

But with luck, some sort of national election will take place around the New Year, and at that point justification for staying in Iraq will become more and more difficult for us.

The question will be more and more difficult to answer: ‘Why should we fight for Iraqi freedom and democracy, when they won’t fight for it themselves?’

The Kurdish Pesh Merga will fight for the Kurds. That is the most effective Iraqi military force, 50,000 troops, and the Kurds have made it clear that force will not be integrated into a national military.

The Shias field @ 12,000 militia, highly motivated but poorly trained. They also refuse to integrate into a national military. In fact, a couple dozen armed Shia militia walked into the Mayor Of Bagdhad’s office the other day, deposed him, & replaced him with a Mayor more acceptable to the Shia.

Will the Iraqis ever field an effective national fighting force, making it possible for us to leave the country in secure hands?

Probably not.

Rumsfeld & Myers suggested the Iraqi security forces field 173,000 soldiers. It’s a bald-faced lie, and everyone knows it, just as everyone knew Rice was lying in her confirmation hearings when she suggested there over 140,000 in the security forces.

Iraq, with an unemployment rate of over 30%, has an awful lot of young men desperate for a paycheck. They enlist, take the first paycheck, and walk away.

Graft and corruption also present a monumental problem.

We can’t turn to an alienated UN for help. Almost everytime the topic of the UN comes up, right wingers reflexively bring up the oil-for-food scandal.

What escapes everyone’s notice is that it wasn’t just UN officials involved in the scandal. It also involved Iraqis. Graft and corruption are a way of life in Iraq.

Incredibly, the Neocons supported the Iranian spy Chalabi, a man convicted of a very large, crimial fraud in Jordan, to take over the Financial Ministry. His family & cohorts are well entrenched there.

Meanwhile, $800 million has disappeared from the Iraq Defense Ministry this year alone. By law, contracts cannot go directly to the sellers; they must go through a middleman, and the middleman must be paid in cash, up front, no bid. The results are predictable. Middlemen walk away with the money, or provide inferior goods. Military units are filled with ‘ghost soldiers,’ with Ministers pocketing the paychecks of imaginary soldiers.

But we’ll pull out anyway, because we’ll have to pull out. The Iraqis want us out in the worst way, and we want out too. It’s a freaking disaster, a colossal misjudgment. More likely than not, a civil war is in the offing.

And you’d better believe I blame Bush and his administration for this enormous screw-up.

More troops? C’mon, guys and gals. Unless we can send in enough troops to lock down Iraq’s entire borders, adding more troops simply creates a much larger target for insurgents and terrorists. Please, try to think through these ideas to their logical conclusion. To effectively lock down the borders would require years and 10’s of billions of dollars in techonology installation in addition to something on the order of 10 times the troops we now have over there. That’s right, about 1.5 million troops divided by 2 shifts equals 750,000 troops to man the borders and effectively stem the flow replacement terrorists and weapons and bomb supplies.

After a few years of technology installation to replace manned oversight of borders, we could draw down that number considerably. But my take is, if we are unwilling to lock down our own borders, why incur the expense and soldier losses attempting to lock down Iraqi borders? I would not be for it, because as an American, I believe in putting America first, third world Arab countries last, if you please.

David,
Placing more troops in Iraq is not an option. We can up the amount for an event such as an election, but we’re unable to keep that many in the field; not without a draft, and no one’s about to commit to any kind of major sacrifice like that, heavens no.

Supposedly, a large number of Iraqi border guards keep watch. Periodically, we blame other countries such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, and others for inadequately protecting the borders. It’s worth noting that the Saudis and the Jordanians reply they’re doing a good job, and that it’s the Iraqis who fail to secure the borders.

Again, that ugly problem of graft and corruption rears its head.

But in case anyone is wondering, no matter how bad Iraq goes, when we draw down the Bush administration will declare victory. “Mission Accomplished!” After all, Saddam Hussein is gone, and if the Iraqis use the opportunity to be free and democratic to instead opt for a Shia dominated government allied with Iran, with central Iraq serving as a wonderland of terrorist training, well, who’s fault is that?

Stupid, stupid, stupid. And I blame this blunder squarely on Bush and the Neocons. ****** idiots.

I asked the same question in a post a while back on the red side—what has this war done, or could it possibly do, for America that would justify the price we continue to pay. I didn’t get any answers back, but I did get called selfish for thinking that we should get something for the lives and money we’ve spent. I expect you will get the same answers (none) to your question.

Good article.

Gee, do you think NATO would lend a hand now?

Neither NATO nor the UN will get involved in this mess, at least not for quite a while. First, there’d have to be an all-out civil war followed by some kind of disastrous slaughters (and threats to oil supplies) followed by Western air support for whatever side is annointed followed by brokered deals and then maybe peace-keeping missions. A higher stakes and more flamable Yugoslavia in the Middle East, anyone?

phx8, you made the point I was alluding to. We are not able to lock down Iraq’s borders, therefore, we cannot stop the violence in Iraq. If we cannot stop the violence in Iraq, why are we wasting American lives and tax dollars. There can be no victory in Iraq in the foreseeable future. Ergo, we need to give the Iraqi’s a deadline to take over their own defense when we pull out. It really is the only logical option left us.

We cannot leave Iraq. Unless you are willing to write off Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel. There’s a reason Iraq was the center of an Empire centuries ago. Its a crossroads state.

The US MUST stay. The alternative is worse.

Irrespective of when, why and, the stated reasons for leaving Iraq, we cannot do so without THE OIL.

Arguably when we do leave, what is left behind in terms of government will be at best marginally better (if at all) than it was when we invaded. As a result, there will be no mutually acceptable negotiations of any kind after we have departed.

The “government” will consist of between 3 and 5 religious factions that each must have policies that are specific to their needs. There will still be radical military groups, terrorists and so forth running rampant.

Unless we have a use for sand, we netter focus on the only real asset…OIL. (and pistachio nuts)

Steve Smith:

Unless we have a use for sand, we netter focus on the only real asset…OIL. (and pistachio nuts)

…and concrete. It is their #2 biggest exported item. Yet we are importing concrete from the US via Haliburton.

Things that make you say “Hmmmm…”

Steve, the oil is no conseqence to our supplies as long as it flows. It matters not who the Iraqis sell their oil to, say China for example. The price of all oil flowing in the world is affected by the supply demand ratio of all oil in the world.

As long as Iraqi oil flows onto the global market, it reduces our price for oil, regardless of who buys it. Check out the economics of global oil supplies in a Google search, tons of information on this fungible currency.

David, what I meant to imply was that if all major producers and purchasers of oil entered a pact not to sell oil to us, we would be in deep yogurt.

I saw a news item yesterday evening depicting that we need more oil processing facilities and, in fact if we could refine the heavier crude we could save $24/barrel.

The piece went on to depict that a single refinery in Arizona has been in the planning, permit, environmental approval process for about 5 years and if it stays on schedule will not refine the first barrel until some year beyond 2010. (a 15 year process).

VEM,
Good article.

We went to war for stupid reasons. We have so much invested into this war that it is hard for the American people to let go. Ask any old lady or old man what they think about the war. They’ll say we can’t just leave we have to finish it. This is pretty much the public’s mind-set. But, what is there to finish? A fued between groups that has been going on for thousands of years. Our leaders had the balls to say we could do it in less than one decade. The only way we could do that is to kill a whole race of people. Usually thats our specialty but, they all look alike. So, who’s accountable for all this carnage and death. Do we turn against our leaders and call for heads to roll or, do we stay the course and follow an IDIOT? Follow the IDIOT seems to be the most common opinion.

Why aren’t our leaders held responsible for the mass death of their people. I Know an Airmen who went to Iraq as an escort at one of our bases over there. His job was to watch Iraqi contractors work on the base. He was armed with an M16 and various other equipment. While he was eating lunch one of the contractors grabbed his gun; he knocked her down and he and another airmen drew there guns on her. She has since been detained beccause she was a spy. The airmen whose gun was taken lost 3 stripes (was demoted). The reason for his demotion was; he “endangered the wellfare of all of those around him.” The General of the Base literally cut the stripes off his uniform. Why is it that the lowest positions are held accountable for their actions yet, the ones in charge have no accountability? I guess it’s that they are in charge you can’t challenge their authority. Who is above the President to pinish him for his mistakes? The American people, congress, the judicial system, WHO? It seems to be the media. But, what repercussions are there for being unpopular in the media. There is no threat. Bush is drunk with power and has nothing holding him back from running this country into the ground.

The whitehouse is admitting they need to reevaluate their time line and keep the republicans in control. Bush is a good ol’boy and was taught to take care of those around you. All they are doing is setting up their next generation of idiots to take over when they leave. All the propaganda suggests America isn’t safe while democrats are in control. People are scared and want safety or at least the illusion of safety. That’s what got them this administration. So, why not try it again and again until the people catch on. It’s about control, the only way to keep it is to have more followers behind your idea than the other guy has behind his. Bush knows this and needs them all to stay where they are. So, he can control all the checks on him and tip the scales to favor him and his minion.

If I were in this adminisrtation I would continue to lower expectations until there were none. It will make Roves “Victory” spin all the more believable.

We cannot leave Iraq. Unless you are willing to write off Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel. There’s a reason Iraq was the center of an Empire centuries ago. Its a crossroads state.

Having no arguments with Aldous’ simply stated reasoning for not abandoning Iraq, it must also be agreed that the administration’s deception and mishandling of the occupation put those very nations at further risk. And, the only action the U.S. can possibly take to reverse this frightening trend is to leave Iraq immediately.

The only way we can salvage a victory in Iraq would be by the infusion of another 100,000 troops. But, if the ‘stay and fight’ crowd cannot get behind such obvious logic, then it was never about establishing an Arab democracy - it’s about not admitting defeat.

Regardless of what happens, I agree with the sentiment that, unlike Vietnam, American troops will not be blamed for what goes wrong. Although, Frank Rich recently pointed out that support for the war and Bush is nearly identical to that of LBJ in March 1968, just before he opted out of a second term run.

However, do not confuse this nation’s long bout of willful ignorance over Iraq as a sign they are susceptible to the RNC/Rove 2006 Mid Term elections ‘Exit Strategy’. There will be no way to hand off responsibility for the state of Iraq given previous ‘inked’ pronouncements. Or, further reconcile the aftermath of an American withdrawal with the cost we’ve already paid.

To believe the Republicans will not pay a dear price, is to believe credibility will magically return to George Bush.

And, that the Left will just stay silent.

I think the White House needs to admit that the Iraqi people are not rising up against the terrorists. They have to want to be free in order to harness momentum and grasp their future. I think we should give Iraq 1 more year and if the Iraqi people cannot rise up and take control, then there is nothing we can do and we should leave and let them deal with their own problem.

The best way we, as Americans, can show support for our troops in harms way, in my opinion, is impeach those leaders who manipulated intelligence information to go to war in Iraq, in the first place.

It would send a clear message to our troops that even though they now have to stay the course, we will support them by immediately removing those leaders who lied to them and to us. We will get them a new Commander-in-Chief they can trust because we, their countrymen, are backing them with our vigilence. This impeachment would send a message to future leaders in our government that we, as American Citizens will not allow them to use our children this way without a just cause.

This impeachment will also go a long way to re-establish our credibility in the world. It will tell other world leaders that we, as Americans, will not tolerate leaders who lie and threaten our intelligence community when the facts don’t fit. They will be able to come to our negotiating tables knowing that we will conduct the business of World Peace honorably.

It will also send a clear message to our intelligence community that we will support them if they come forward to tell us the truth. It will let them know we will not tolerate a Commander-in-Chief or any official at any level “fixing a fight.”

Impeachment is the correct way and the only way, as I see it, to honor all our men and women in uniform. It will mean that those brave Americans who died in Iraq not only gave their lives to free a nation from a tyrant under but gave their lives to free our own country from manipulating, corrupt politicians.

Cindy Sheehan, as well as all those families who have lost love ones in this war, must stand up and join hands with those who lost love ones on 9/11 and demanded answers. We, as Americans, must support them by starting impeachment action or we will have another leader in the future who could lead us into another more disastrous action without just cause.

Since the next in line to succeed if both the President and Vice-President are impeached is the Speaker of the House, who is also a Republican. This removes any political intent on my part to change parties.

Let’s bring credibility and dignity back to the White House and the Pentagon.