Pullout = Shortsighted

[Jack_Dawson]

I don't support a pullout, and not just because it's political kryptonite. Yes the war was a horrible, ill-planned disaster. But we ARE there now and running away seriously does embolden the terrorists. Damn I sound like Bill O'Reilly.

What I support is a DOUBLING of the troops to secure the borders, which is what Lt. General Jay Garner recommended in the first place before he got sacked.

:beer:

[cobaindrain]

1. doubling the troops?

Where are you going to get these men, especially with enlistment numbers down. You're going to be scraping the bottom of the barrel here.

[Davis_X_Machina]

3. Wanna draft? n/t

[cobaindrain]

10. no

draft = political suicide and mass revolt.

the canadian hotels would become one large frat party of middle-upper middle class white kids on exile.

[stop the bleeding]

4. no shit - and how about spending 300 billion dollars here to

secure our borders. that would help keep the Terraist that we created in Iraq out of the US

[Erika]

24. not just men, women also

I heard a right winger W supporter call in to CSpan talking about how she supported our men in Iraq. They are dense people.

[stop the bleeding]

34. to say a Rwinger is dense is

redundant:rofl:

[Tiggeroshii]

67. We aren't gonna increase ally participation that's for sure

We've got them pretty mad...

[JI7]

2. things have moved beyond the point where that would have been

effective.

[leanin_green]

132. Let's face it, it's a mess no matter what we do. So. . .

perhaps we should be looking at just what mess would be easier to clean up and apply ourselves to that. Levelling a country and then leaving because it has become uncomfortable to us at home is IMHO the height of international irresponsibility. We, as a nation, no matter who our leaders may be(legitimate or otherwise)have blood on our hands when it comes to the Iraqi people. They are a part of our national karma(if you will). When we make mistakes in our own individual lives, the responsible thing to do is own them and try to repair any damage we may have caused as an act of contrition. It is natural guilt and it has its own costs and a means to meet those costs.

[Mr_Spock]

5. MMMMMmmmm!

:popcorn:

[tallahasseedem]

37. Move over, I'll join ya'

:popcorn:

[insane_cratic_gal]

120. Make room for me!

:popcorn:

I can see a lot of this is going to be going on :spank:

[leanin_green]

135. Anyone bring plastic sheeting? It could get messy!

:woohoo: :sarcasm: :applause:

[Walt Starr]

6. We'll never be able to double the troops and staying there with the

current troop level is only making matters worse.

Bring them home now.

[mike_c]

7. yes, you sound like Bill O'Reilly....

Staying creates more terrorists daily, all around the world. And most of people that would be "emboldened" in Iraq are not "terrorists" by any stretch of the imagination. All those mythical foreign fighters are terrorists, no doubt.... Problem is, there really aren't very many of them.

[hwmnbn]

8. Where will you get the extra troops from?......

We're already in stop-loss mode, 2nd and 3rd deployments.

Are you suggesting we redeploy all our troops from within Iraq and put them on the borders of Syria and Iran?

[Leopolds Ghost]

115. Good idea. Better yet, shake hands with all Shia factions and "reposition"

All US troops to within the borders of Iraqi Kurdistan.

Offer to stay and protect the Kurds from invasion and help
"diversify their land-locked economy" in return for an oil
profit-sharing scheme with the rest of Iraq to help stabilize things.

No appearance of cut and run required.

Of course, Cheney will never agree to this because the mature oil fields are in US-friendly Kurdistan. The light, sweet crude is in the southern desert. And many refining areas are in the Sunni triangle south of Baghdad. If we don't isolate and pacify the oil-free Sunni triangle, Shiites might break away and sell all their oil to Iran for (!!!) Euros.

[ToolTex]

9. Now. Next year. Ten years. The results in Iraq will be the same.

Just more dead Americans, the longer we remain.

[KnowerOfLogic]

158. You are correct. The decision to invade was fatally flawed. No amount

of troops, time, or strategizing will change the inevitable outcome by one iota.

[KnowerOfLogic]

159. You are correct. The decision to invade was fatally flawed. No amount

of troops, time, or strategizing will change the inevitable outcome by one iota.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

11. Better get to work signing up recruits then

'Cause there's not enough new blood.

[johnaries]

12. Where do we get them? n/t

[Spazito]

13. You don't think being there emboldens them more?

It was the greatest gift that could have been given to the 'terraists' and the gift just keeps giving with Abu Graib, secret prisons, rapes, using white phosphorus and I could go on and on. It is the Iraqis, themselves, that are fighting against the U.S. occupation, securing the borders will do nothing.

The Iraqis have more than enough armaments to outlast the U.S. thanks to the lack of securing the weapons dumps, etc, so they don't need the borders porous to keep supplied, Rumsfeld et al made sure that would not be a problem.

[annabanana]

51. You have it right, Spazito...

Their argument is bankrupt.
(and "embolden" is a stupid word)

[Spazito]

54. Thanks, annabanana

I appreciate your comment!

[leanin_green]

136. Not to mention the excellent training facility against our tactics,

weapons, etc. Jeez, we stepped in a pile of it, didn't we? Played right into their hands. The one thing they could count on from us was our overriding greed.

[Cha]

162. Yeah, it all goes back

to "the way the war was handled"..like a bunch of keystone cops..only it's not funny.

And I think we should withdraw and anyone who thinks we shouldn't should go help the soldiers in Iraq right now.

[Wilms]

14. You go. n/t

[Binka]

23. Where?

[Wilms]

32. Ahhhhh...

...just fill in the blank. x(

[Erika]

15. Sunnis and Shiites hate each other, Kurds stand alone

This is the basic issue which has nothing to do with "insurgents". The recent abusive prison was Shiite Iraqis torturing Sunni Iraqis.

Let them have their civil war. We should not be a part of it. We got rid of Hussein. They need to determine and fight for their own future.

[leanin_green]

137. Well, there is Pakistan to the north. No lover of the Kurds there. n/t

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LSK]

17. it is an INSURGENCY

You an say it, INSURGENCY. Repeat it. Dont buy into the GOP lying points. The Iraqis dont want us there. PERIOD.

And if you are already a terrorist, there is no way you can be any more emboldened then you already are.

[Jack_Dawson]

42. A lot of Iraqis DO want us there

Esp. the ones with kids and a job. How do you just abandon an entire country because you lost 2,000 lives when they've lost 100,000? Bush made this fucking mess and he can clean it up. I feel very bad for our troops. Even though a lot of them voted for this idiot. I still feel bad. But running away will make us the joke of the planet.

[lyonn]

46. Hey, we need to get out of the way and let the Iraqis

give democracy a try. Try Murtha's idea of keeping troops on the ready in case of an emergency. Isn't that what we are doing now only making Iraqis miserable and fearful as we patrol streets, pointing guns, busting into peoples homes, destroying their infrastructure daily. I saw photos of Baghdad days before we attacked and then photos now. Can't recognize the place. We must really be welcomed protectors over there, sarcasm.

[LSK]

47. what do we have to do with those 40% of Iraqis who have a job??

For Christ sakes, our fvcking contractors are stealing their jobs. WAKE UP. The terrorist are not going to go slaughter the Iraqis when we leave. THATS JUST FUCKING STUPID.

[lumpy]

73. "Joke of the planet" Dawson?

News for you, we are the joke of the planet. And if the next argument is that 'we will lose face', still more news, we don't have anymore 'face' to lose.

[Karenina]

90. Please volunteer to take the place

of any soldier there who has figured out that your line of reasoning is TOTAL UNMITIGATED BULLSHIT. While you're at it, do convince all your family members and neighbors to sign up to get mangled and murder Iraqis for NO REASON other than the profits of your beloved Übermenschen. They too can join the "noble cause" of being shot up and traumatized, only to return home to be shamefully neglected.

ABANDON a country? The *MIC was NEVER an intimate supporter of Iraq unless it meant fomenting death and destruction. (See: Saddam and Rummy photo). Americans have no knowledge of, historic interest in or respect for Iraqis, nor do they give a flying FUCK about sand n******, Hajis, rag/towelheads, camel jockeys etc.

80% of Iraqis would LOVE for your military, your corrupt corporations, your Negroponte-inspired quislings and your mercenaries to LEAVE THEM TO THEIR OWN DEVICES.

You ALREADY ARE the profoundly sick, very UNFUNNY joke of the planet.

[Ms. Clio]

101. Please provide a credible source for your assertion that "a lot of Iraqis"

want the U.S. to stay.

Failure to do will only make YOU look like the joke of the planet.

[Zhade]

104. Prove your assertion.

NT!

[Ms. Clio]

134. He discovered he can't do that, so now he has completely shifted the terms

of his original "argument."

[Zhade]

152. Figures.

NT!

[Media_Lies_Daily]

144. When are you signing up to go over? Send us a postcard, will you?

[Douglas Carpenter]

147. let's consider what the Iraqi people think:

polls of Iraqi opinion:

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m17469&date=05-nov-2005_03:0
"Some polls have asked Iraqis specifically about the presence of U.S. troops, and guess what: they want us to leave. A February poll by the U.S. military, cited by the Brookings Institution, found that 71 percent of Iraqis "oppose the presence of Coalition Forces in Iraq." This poll was taken only in urban areas, but others have found much the same sentiment. According to a January 2005 poll by Abu Dhabi TV/Zogby International, 82 percent of Sunni Arabs and 69 percent of Shiite Arabs favor the withdrawal of U.S. troops either immediately or after an elected government is in place."
and this one is a from the British Ministry of Defense
link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/23/ixportaltop.html
"Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified - rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province;
• 82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops;
• less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security;
• 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;
• 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened;
• 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces."
_______________
Here another link regarding polls of Iraq opinion:
http://www.comw.org/pda/0501br17append.html

[BillZBubb]

18. Doubling the troops = Foolish

"Seriously embolden the terrorists" what a friggin' laugh. They've got all the "emboldening" they need already.

Iraq is descending into the civil war that was inevitable the minute the Chimperor attacked. Our staying or leaving won't change that result, it will merely delay the last acts. By staying we leave American troops in the middle unable to prevent what is to come. Adding more troops only means more American targets.

[blitzen]

19. "The terrorists" is a BS phrase....

Go ahead and call them "insurgents" or whatever...but the guys who are causing trouble in Iraq are NOT "the terrorists." They are various groups in Iraq who are dealing with local conflicts. They couldn't care less about inflicting harm or "jihad" on the West.

[Freedomfried]

20. Well Jack, do you need directions to the Armed Forces Recruitment center?

Let us know, I'm sure somebody can help you out.

[Straight Shooter]

21. Consider this. The Iraqi people are sheltering the insurgents.

The insurgents are the ones who are being labeled the terrorists, except of course for the members of AQ, etc., that are bona fide terrorists. The Iraqis are sheltering the insurgents because they don't want us there anymore. Plain and simple. They want the occupiers out.

700 attacks a week, Murtha said, against our troops. 700. Who are they going to attack when we're gone? Other Iraqis? Okay, then there's a civil war. So, basically we're there to stop a civil war.

How about letting the Iraqis decide their fate. We can't keep this up. This war is breaking our financial back and it's jeopardizing the future in ways we can't even begin to imagine at this time. People here are suffering and are going to suffer more the longer we're there, and I honestly don't think we are doing the Iraqis one damn bit of good anymore.

A dishonest war cannot be expected to yield honest results.

edit typo

[Erika]

30. Iraq does not have autonomy and we can't change that

no matter how many troops we send there. American deaths have to stop. Enough is enough.

[Straight Shooter]

31. Not just American deaths.

Iraqi deaths must stop, also. We can't control what happens when we leave. They can at least attempt to control it.

[leanin_green]

138. That tends to happen when you keep losing sons &daughters to . . .

collateral damage and indiscriminate targeting. Kind of gives you a lump right here.

[thoughtanarchist]

22. "embolden the terrorists"???????

Don't fall for the R/W spin.

These are Iraqis that oppose the occupation just like we would resist a foreign occupation on our own cities.

Murtha seems to advocate pulling out of combat (not necessarily out of the region) and to have troops available to monitor the situation and to respond to changing conditions.

It seems like just the type of "compromise" that will save lives.

Again, don't fall for the spin.

[Tom Joad]

25. I agree. You do sound like Bill O' Reilly.

I do respect you though because i know you are at this very moment signing up to serve.

However, even that will not help, as there is simply not enough to join you. "Double the troops at the border" You gotta be kidding.

Finally, what good would troops at the Iraq border do? as quoted by Murtha 80% of Iraqis want US OUT. 45% support attacks on the US.
we are heavily outnumbered there. It is the Iraqis who are attacking the US.
I do think that we should do all we can to remove foreign troops from Iraq. That would mean first and foremost the US and British must leave.

[BattyDem]

26. This would have been a great idea ...

if it happened right after Saddam was overthrown. At that time, the Iraqi's had hope for the future and they probably believed that our troops sincerely wanted to help them. But now, Iraqi's view us as occupiers. We are the enemy that is killing them, torturing them, stealing their country's riches and making their lives miserable.

It's too late. We lost. The country is on the brink of civil war and new terrorists are being "born" everyday. There's nothing more we can do. We f*cked up. It's time to accept that and let them take control of their own fate. Securing the Iraqi borders won't help us now because we have created so much hate for the US in the Middle East. All we can do is secure our own borders and eventually, elect a leader who will start mending fences. It's going to take decades to fix this. :-(

[journalist3072]

27. I agree with you...

I don't like this illegal, unjust war one bit.

But the fact of the matter is, for good or worse, we have bombed the heck out of Iraq, and turned that country into smithereens.

We have an obligation to the Iraqi people to fix what we damn broke.

On the other hand, at what point do we say: we lost this war. It's a lost cause. We f*cked up.

And at what point does the Congress just simply stop funding the war, like the did Vietnam?

[yankeedem]

28. No problem

When will it be over? How many people have to die for this? How many of your relatives are you willing to send over there for the terrorists to practice on?

Leave Iraq now. Stop the dying.

[KC21304]

29. The only thing emboldening the terrorists

is that their recruiting numbers are going through the roof. And we can thank the invasion of Iraq for that. And every minute we spend there means more terrorists. That cannot be disputed by anyone who is honest.

[creeksneakers2]

33. I partly agree with you

I think we owe it to the Iraqis now to stay involved until they have a permanent government and it has a reasonable chance to defend itself against the insurgency. I agree with the majority Dem position that we need to pressure the Iraqis by letting them know that we aren't going to stay there forever. I also believe our presence there is provoking violence.

I don't agree with doubling the troops, because that's trying to solve all the problems ourselves and that's impossible. We would just double the casualties and costs.

Even Murtha wants the troops to stay for another six months and the longest time most Dems are talking about is about two years. We aren't all that far apart really.

The GOP is trying to split the base from the party. I'm not going to help them succeed.

[cry baby]

36. deleted, sorry, replied to wrong poster.

[PATRICK]

35. But the present choice is NOT for alternative strategies

From lies to the next war the Bushco course is set in rock and so is the outcome. It is not a question of "what if" as a reasonable objection to a pullout. It is that a pullout is the only alternative left in facing the set plans of the WH.

Get Bush out and then we'll talk about better ideas than pulling out. Right now it not only does not matter if we pull out but it takes widespread American interest attrition out of the killing zone. To keep trying to be reasonable is to evade the reality. Bush has forced everything. The only choice left is needless death for his benefit that will ruin Iraq and America(to name just two) or getting rid of Bush. it is not a fantasy to vote "no confidence" in this direct manner. It is a fantasy to pretend that any good or traditional US policy goal can come from the horrid conduct of the self-serving frauds WHO WILL NOT CHANGE, will not even now give the military WHAT IT NEEDED EVEN BEFORE THE INVASION. It is Bush who has made this all or nothing starkly clear and easy for people of principle. Now he can get out and let real humans, real men take up the reins of policy. But it pointless to defend a drawn out tragedy CAN achieve anything different in intractable hands even now grasping at other things than the nobler objectives they never respected.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

38. yes, let's secure desert.

next we march to Russia in the winter!
They'll never see it coming!

Seriously though, i don't know about you but when I step in shit I don't go, "well - I'm here now - and leaving would surely mean the shit has bested me - and if i walk away from this I embolden the shit to continually get on my shoes."

This "emboldening" argument is brought to you by the makers of all the other lies, why do you - at this point - believe any of their horseshit talking points?

[Jack_Dawson]

41. Iraqi Civilians don't want us to leave

People that aren't bombing everything. People that go to work and have kids to raise - they sure as shit don't want to leave their country to Al-Zarqawi.

[LeftCoast]

48. Just wondering how many Iraqi civilians you know?

:shrug:

[skipos]

49. 57% want us to leave according to this poll from April

Do you think it has gone down since then? I appreciate your opinion in this matter, but you might want to stop talking about how most Iraqis want us to stay there.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-poll-cover_x.htm

What do you think?

[Ms. Clio]

100. No reply to your post that actually provides FACTS

instead of bullshit talking points.

I'm completely unsurprised.

[lyonn]

52. Remember, we made Zarqawi who he is

Bush knew where his training camp was prior to and during Shock and Awe, but, he did not attack him. Why? The only terrorist that bush knew of in Iraq he left unscathed.

[Leopolds Ghost]

118. Yep. * wanted a human face for the terrorists... so he let Zarkawi go n/t

[slay]

58. So what now - we're the police force for the world?

Or just the countries the Republicans tell you we should be involved with? (I'll give ya a hint - it's the ones with oil.) How easily our minds are manipulated by those in power. So sad. :(

[lumpy]

74. Iraqi polls say want US

to get out.

[Ms. Clio]

102. Polls schmolls--Dawson somehow just KNOWS what the Iraqis want

[Zhade]

105. That's the second time you've made that claim. Prove it.

NT!

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. So how many more deaths do you support?

I suppose you also support a draft so we have enough troops to secure those borders. :eyes:

[Jack_Dawson]

60. So if we leave, deaths cease?

:eyes:

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. Uh duh

Our soldiers won't die if we pull out.

[leanin_green]

139. No, just the Iraqis we leave behind in the struggle for their own country

Gee, thanks America, we knew we could count on you.

[proud2BlibKansan]

154. They have been killing each other in the middle east for

thousands of years now. How arrogant that we think we can stop it.

[punpirate]

40. There is chaos in Iraq now...

... because the neo-cons wanted that chaos. They and their friends are at this very moment looting the country (and the American taxpayer). The longer we stay, the longer they are able to continue to do exactly that.

That was the plan, all along. Why did they really want Hussein gone? Because he was a threat to both the US and the world, as George Bush said? Hardly, we know that wasn't true. Because he and his government were the only things standing in the way of the looting of that country by the neo-cons, the only things standing in the way of the neo-cons making a puppet state of Iraq for their profit? That might be much closer to the truth.

The Gulf War was created by Poppy Bush as a cover to kill Saddam Hussein--in order to create the kind of chaos in Iraq we find today--for the same purposes. They've been trying to do this for sixteen years now. And you want to let them finish the job....

[norml]

43. Only 6% of those we've detained in Iraq are not native Iraqis.

You repeat the lie that the insurgency is made up mostly of outsiders.

Our staying emboldens the terrorists.

If we leave, if we turn it over to the locals, if we let go of the contracts, if we let the Bremmer Rules go away, if we let them rebuild their own country, it's most likely that they will be better able to throw out those outsiders who are blowing up things.

By the way, do you think we should re invade Vietnam?

[Mountainman]

44. If we had stayed in Vietnam for 10 more years the outcome would have been

the same except that we would have had 100,000 troops killed instead of 58,000. You are wishing for something that will not happen. There will not be a peaceful resolve to this war. What we can do now is start the beginning of the end. To not do so is to have many thousands more people killed that has to be.

The sooner you face up to the fact that what you want will not happen the sooner we can get this behind us.

[Binka]

45. AMEN!

'nuff said.

[leanin_green]

140. RUFKM??? The same assholes running this thing were young men. .

in the Nixon Whitehouse during Nam. Except, if they had to do it all over again, they wouldn't worry about public opinion and what the rest of the world thinks of them. They would have continued the carpet bombing and blown North Vietnam back into the stoneage. Oh, wait, that sounds a lot like things today. Kill them all and let God sort them out. Because that's what the tactic is over there now. I think they learned their lessons from Vietnam very well, just not in the way goodhearted, peace loving people tend to do.

[Eugene]

50. It would be closing the barn door after the horse is gone.

Garner and Shinseki recommended 240000 troops
to stabilize the situation as it was in 2003.
That was before the looting, the ill-advised
disbanding of the Iraqi Army, the de-Baathification
debacle, the rampant corruption of the CPA, and Abu Ghraib.
The occupation has bungled the security and
political situation at every opportunity.

The insurgency is mostly home grown with Sunni,
Shiite, and Kurd militias dragging the country
into civil war. Securing the borders might keep
out a few foreign fighters, but they are a small
fraction of the conflict.

I don't like the cutting and running, but we need
an exit plan.

[Ignacio Upton]

53. What we need is to TRAIN the damn Iraqi troops

After that we should leave. If we tried hard enough, we could get enough troops trained for a 2007 withdrawal. Unfortunately Bush is not serious about training.

[lumpy]

76. The USmilitary has done plenty of training.

Hasn't worked, ain't gonna work', because of Iraqi infighting.

[Zhade]

106. Have you noticed that we train them and then they switch sides?

And they take all that training and new guns with them.

[Swamp Rat]

55. I agree! You DO sound like JUST LIKE Bill O'Reilly. Here's a pic for you:

:hi:



So, you support doubling the troops in Iraq? Then go here to enlist:

http://www.militaryenlist.com/army.htm

If you keep posting on DU, we'll all know you didn't go.

[spanone]

56. Get real. We could triple the troops and never win this war.

[slay]

57. We should leave now because we never should have been there to begin with

I feel bad for the Iraqi people, I really do. But this war was NEVER about helping the Iraqi's be free - it was about oil and making money for the military industrial complex. The fact that the Republicans can convince otherwise intelligent people that we should stay gives me very little hope for humanity as a whole. People are so easily led by manipulative rhetoric that they cease to think like intelligent, compassionate people. You should NEVER trust these government bastards. We need to leave Iraq now. I know it sucks and it should. There comes a time (I hope) when we have to quit lying to ourselves and admit that America has become an EVIL EMPIRE. :(

[ballabosh]

59. I admit I'm torn on this

I want our troops out of this stupid war. But I don't want Iraq to be another Iran, or (even worse) another Afghanistan. One of the pieces of evidence that we use against the war is the number of Iraqi citizens being killed by the U.S. I don't want to forget them after we leave.

I'm in a Catch-22 here and I don't know what the answer is.

Of course, none of this would be a problem if we had avoided this idiot war in the first place......

[Straight Shooter]

63. Afghanistan wouldn't be in the mess it's in if we hadn't gone to Iraq.

We could have helped to create a better Afghanistan. Instead, everyone dropped the ball and went running to Iraq because that's what the bush cabal manipulated the intelligence to accomplish.

Now we have two messes. As you said, none of this would be a problem if we had avoided this idiot in the first place.

Ooops. You said idiot war. Same difference, I suppose.

[Generic Other]

61. When I get drunk, I drink alcohol not GOP kool-aid

Pullout, premature ejac, withdraw, retreat, back-off, get the hell outta Baghdad.

Anything short of that is diddling in Bush's wet dream.

Consensual rape.

[neverforget]

62. Doubling troops will do nothing but double the number of targets AND

be counterproductive in training Iraqis. The US is already doing almost all the fighting and the whole point is to get the Iraqis to fight on their own. IF there was a time for doubling the troops it would have been during the invasion. But having said that, we should have never invaded. Iraq is America's greatest strategic blunder and it's all Bush's fault.

[DaDeacon]

64. You are correct however hard it is for me to say you are right...

Look it we can't just leave but we can't very well stay or double or troops as we aren't retaining or recruiting at a level that we can do that. So if not an "up & go" what then? The answer is the same as it was a year ago during the elections a set date that we will remove ourselves from that theater and a slow removal of forces during that time. this does two things for us.

1: It send a message to the people of the middle east that we aren't occupiers. That we will leave.

2: it let's the Iraq people know by what date they will need to have their house in order before we pull out.

I agree with anyone who thinks that that area will explode when we go but the truth is is has to. This is there land, oil, and people. We must start to respect that. They must fight for freedom on there terms. Come to compromises for their future on their terms not ours and until that time whatever govt, constitution , our power in that area will be false.

[norml]

65. Did Vietnam "explode" when we left?

Did the daily body count in Vietnam rise or fall?

Did they make war on the West or spread Communism?

Did they not instead go to war with the Khmer Rough, and depose them?

Would things have worked out better had we stayed in Vietnam?

Do you think we should make like Rambo and re invade?

Would that make things better?

US out of Iraq now!

[leanin_green]

141. That was more of a civil war that we interferred with. There is no. . .

North Iraq and South Iraq(not yet anyway). That civil war would begin once we left. That country would tear itself apart because of the commodity that brought us there in the first place, OIL.

[leftofthedial]

66. naw, let's just nuke 'em back to the Stone Age*

that'll show 'em.

I mean we ARE there, so anything we do is okay now, right?

a few nukes oughtta disembolden 'em, right Jack?







* Curtis LeMay

[Mr_Spock]

68. Would I have to pull out if I could see better?

:rofl:

[Darranar]

69. "embolden the terrorists"

Yes, a withdrawal likely will encourage those who oppose brutal imperial invasions of countries without justification. That is a positive development.

Most significantly it will stop the brutal slaughter of people in Iraq by the foreign invader, the most significant obstacle to Iraqi stability and democracy as it stands.

[RagingInMiami]

70. Fuck that

Americans need to accept the fact that they can't win every goddamn war and battle. Americans need to accept the fact that the world will continue to breathe with or without their authority. Americans need to accept the fact that what this administration has done is almost as bad as what Hitler, Saddam and Stalin did in their time.

I'm sick of this American holier than thou attitude that we were raised in. It leaves most Americans in denial.

As it is right now, most Americans are arrogant and ignorant when it comes to political and global matters. (Remember all those assholes pouring out French wine in the streets because France wouldn't help us invade Iraq?)

The Germans and the Japanese became better societies after Hitler and Tojo. It's time for us to do the same. But first, we need to accept the truth.

[Jack_Dawson]

126. 403-3

Even the Dems know it's a horrible idea. Bush made his bed and he's going to have to lie in it. I feel bad for the troops but 70% of them voted for this idiot.

[tkmorris]

128. OK, now I KNOW you are full of it

That vote means nothing and everyone in the US with an IQ bigger than their hat size knows it. That you would cite it to back your position simply means that you are being disingenous.

I know you aren't dumb enough to actually believe it because you figured out how to turn your computer on.

[greatauntoftriplets]

72. Planning to enlist?

n/t

[Jawja]

75. The Vietnam solution?

:shrug:

[immoderate]

77. Yeah, give them double the targets.

--IMM

[MadHound]

78. I would rather embolden terrorists than increase the number of terrorists

Every day we stay, every casualty we suffer, every child we kill, every brick we separate from ever-lovin' brick, we are creating more terrorists by the tens and dozens. This is a fact, there is no doubt. When a person loses their family, their child, their life and yet are still walking, a terrorist is created.

A War on Terrorism has no chance to succeed, and all chances to fail. We have seen this, experienced this, and indeed perpetrated it ourselves in years past, yet we refuse to learn from it. Terrorism has been around since the dawn of mankind, for terrorism is simply guerrilla warfare by any other name. And guerrilla warfare, ie terrorism, is how the poor of the world have always waged war against the rich. The Viking raids on Europe, our forefathers winning their freedom from England won by fighting an extensive guerrilla war, Vietnam fighting the Japanese, French and US in succession.

Terrorism/guerrilla warfare is a war of attrition and years. While the US pours in money and resources to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, our opponent pours in resources only amounting in the millions. Witness the debacle of the USSR in Afghanistan. A numerically smaller force in essence bled the USSR to the point where they set in motion the failure of the Soviet Empire.

We are insuring our own demise if we continue in Iraq. We have taken a nation that was at peace with us, that posed no threat to us or its neighbors, and made it into a focal point for those who wish us dead. Instead of having to come here, we have made ourselves a target over there. Our self created opposition can use the resources and knowledge of their home in order to drag the war on and on, and the US will finally uses so much resources that we fall. Rome suffered this fate, the British suffered this fate, the Soviet Union suffered this fate, and if we continue to wage this illegal, immoral war, we will suffer this fate.

So rather than to create more and more terrorists, rather than slowly but surely bleed our country dry for oil and empire, rather than doubling the amount of soldiers and resources that we are pouring down an oil well, let us bring the troops home, make peace with the Iraqis, and apologize to the world for our gluttony and avarice.

Yes, we will still have hundreds of thousands of people who are ready to do our country harm, that is the price a country pays when it attempts to impose itself on another for no good reason. But any danger to the US would be more remote, and defending ourselves, truly defending these shores would only cost a fraction of what we are paying now for the Iraqi debacle. As has been shown time and again, Homeland Security as conceived by Bushco is lacking in both resources and competency. The resources are being diverted to Iraq and corporate pockets, and the competency is due to cronyism as was demonstrated by the aftermath of Katrina.
Rather we should bring our forces home, and increase the resources given to preventing attacks here at home. I realize that the incompetency and cronyism can't be dealt with fully until after this mis-administration has left, but it can be blunted with the results of next year's elections and a return to a Democratic Congress. And even straining the funds for a truly secure country through the cheesecloth of cronyism currently occupying the Whitehouse, more resource would reach the correct hands and we could restore a semblance of security and sanity to this country.

In addition, remaining at peace with one's worldly neighbors tends to breed less terrorism. If people aren't pissed at you for occupying their country, they're much more willing to get along with you. Yes, we should face the fact that we have wreaked much harm in a pre-emptive invasion for oil and empire. We should make amends to the Iraqi people for the crimes that we have committed. A War on Terror?! I would say that using Shock n' Awe, torturing innocents, and burning children to death with white phosphorous is a War Of Terror! Nothing that we can do will ever repay the population for the destruction of their country and the tens of thousands of innocents that we have killed and wounded. But withdrawing ASAP is the right, the moral thing to do, and is the minimum that we should do.

And for those who argue that our withdrawl will lead to disastrous consequences in the Middle East, well, you're correct, it will. A civil war in Iraq is almost certain, with an outcome unfavorable to the US quite likely. But these events our going to occur no matter when we pull out, for any political entity set up with the approval of the US is going to be considered illegal and il-legit by the Iraqi people who will fight to remove it as soon as we're gone, whenever we're gone.

Wars of empire are foolish, self serving for the few, and ultimately disastrous. It creates enemies where none existed before and drains nations dry of resources and wealth. If we continue to invest our wealth and resources into this one, we will plunge our country into darkness. We have already saddled our grandchildren with a deficit that they will have to pay, our debt is such that it endangers our economy. We no longer have the resources to properly deal with the next natural disaster, much less the past one. We have sacrificed the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast and Florida on the pyre of war, and our proceeding to toss our old, poor and disabled on the flames also.
This madness much stop, and the time is NOW! All of our reasons for this war have had their lies laid bare, and our staying brings no good, merely more evil. And quite frankly if we continue to remain it only shows how dark our collective national soul has become.

The time to leave is now. Let us work towards that, for in that direction lays the solution for our national security, salvation, and sanity.

[Leopolds Ghost]

122. Guerilla warfare and terrorism are not synonymous n/t

[MadHound]

145. Sure they are

Here:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerilla>

Terrorism is what guerilla warfare is called by the those who are opposing it. Terrorism is simply the value negative perjorative for guerilla warfare.

[K-W]

79. Our being in Iraq HELPS the terrorists.

Wake up friend. Only the neo-con liars are pushing the reasoning that leaving will make al queda stronger. Everyone who actually knows anything about terrorism is saying exactly the opposite.

[RazzleDazzle]

80. You didn't hear what Murtha said?

and as I understand it, he's been talking to some top brass in the active military which is how he came to his new understanding of the situation.

He said, paraphrasing, that our troops have become the enemy, the target. That's not going away until we go away.

[Jack_Dawson]

81. Everyone is the Target!

In case you haven't been watching the news, suicide bombers are increasingly targeting civilians.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10107233/

Yes we should have NEVER gone into Iraq. Yes Bush and Cheney are EVIL and INCOMPETENT beyond words. But I don't understand how letting a country descend into civil war is going to result in fewer casualties for the Iraqis.

But yes, if we're only worried about Americans, by all means cut and run.

JD

[thebigidea]

82. how completely deranged to think our presence there is helping Iraqis

if by "Iraqis" you mean "handpicked puppets," then perhaps a case can be made for them wanting us there.

[goodhue]

86. Murtha's point is that presence of US troops is causing violence

US troops are part of the problem, not part of the solution. More troops is pouring gas on fire.

[K-W]

87. A country cant descend into war if it is already at war. EOM

[Swamp Rat]

91. Have you enlisted yet, to help the Iraqis prevent an Iraqi civil war?

I assume everyone on this thread cares about the welfare of all humans, specifically (here)Americans and Iraqis. We obviously disagree on how to help them and ourselves.

Most here want the US military to leave immediately, while you want to double the forces. Many of us have already done our part by protesting for peace and demanding immediate withdrawal, a process that continues at this very moment.

Are you going to enlist in the military to help double our troop strength? If that is your belief, that doubling the troop strength will solve or help stem the tide of impending crisis, you should follow through... walk the walk. :patriot:

[NYC Liberal]

92. Iraq is in a civil war..RIGHT NOW!

The outcome will be the same whether we leave now or years later. The ONLY difference will be that thousands more Americans will be dead. There will perhaps be a short period afterwards where there is more violence. But if the Iraqis decide to fight it out, it is there's to fight, not ours. Sorry, but it's the truth.

So. If you want thousands more Americans dead with the same outcome as staying, then stay in Iraq.

[Deja Q]

83. There's far more to Iraq than emboldening terrorists:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5398470

[Jose Diablo]

84. I think the recruiters could find plenty of new troops

They are just looking in the wrong places. They need to go on campuses to the Young Republican meet-ups. Lots of fresh OFU's there.

We could even help the recruiters by walking with them and pointing out who to press into service. Make sure a bus is ready to transport them to boot camp though. We may need to sedate them for the bus ride. And of course have a briefcase with the proper blank forms stating, "Greetings, Your neighbors have selected you...." to make the whole thing nice and legal.

After the campuses, then we could take the recruiters to places like Ruby's Bar and Grill on Friday and Saturday nights. Plenty of young republicans there also. Young and healthy, though a little slow.

Maybe we should volunteer our services to help the recruiters find the 'right stuff' for the Republican's war in Iraq. It's the patriotic thing to do.

[Swamp Rat]

93. ¡Bueno idea!

How 'bout we follow O'Reilly's advice and make a comprehensive list? We can get every single name of every college republican and send it to local recruiters. We can HELP the recruiters locate them (hiding under tables, in mama's closet, etc.) and turn them in for immediate selection for active duty on the front lines.

Let's help Uncle Sam make his enlistment quota! Let's get every republican youth to join the military and send them directly into battle, for 3 tours of duty. :patriot:

[Jose Diablo]

94. I don't know about the 3 tours stuff

It's kinda delicate to force a young man into active service for more that a 2 year stretch. That would seem to indicate 2-9 month tours. With a 2 month induction training period(6 weeks + 2 weeks to say goodbye to their sweetie), then a 9 month tour, followed by 1 month to decompress then 1 month to be with a sweetie, then back for another 9 months and finally a 2 month decompression period for psych tests and let the shrinks watch them before they re-enter the world. Thats do-able I think.

Yep, it would bring structure and fucking discipline into their wayward ways. We democrats are too unreliable for this kind of stuff. Only the Republicans know how to fight. We Dems hate fighting so I am sorry to say, I doubt we should be depended on to do this kinda stuff. It's sort of embarrassing, but we Dem's better stay here and comfort the unmarried ladies. Thats all we are good for, unlike those tough guy Republicans. They are good at fighting.

2 years active duty is perfect followed by 6 years active reserve, thats 8 years they owe Uncle Rummy. They can play soldier once a month and 6 weeks in the summer for another 6 years. Get top pay too. Let me see, accounting for inflation, $25/day plus all they can eat should do it. Thats fair. As youth, they owe it to Uncle Rummy for the fine high school education they received free of charge.

Edit: Made a mistake accounting for inflation, adjusted it down to $25 from $35/day. It's hard to really know what the inflation has been these last 40 years. And minor edits of punctuation. Must be clear.

[Swamp Rat]

99. I mentioned 3 tours because my cousin expects to be forced to do 3.

If he can do it, so can ALL the college republicans.

You are right about "comforting the unmarried ladies." We are certainly better at that. :D

[Jose Diablo]

107. Sorry about your cousin, I hope it goes well for him/her

My next door neighbor's oldest son is in Iraq now, on his second tour. He is what used to be called an armorer. He handles munitions so he generally is busy loading transports with ammo and arming and mounting aerial armament in a protected area. However, the way it is now, you can never tell if anyplace is safe. Thats what I hear anyway.

He's an OK guy, he just wanted a little extra money when he joined back in 99 or so. But being married, he's not what I would call a happy camper about all this. His family is financially not doing well, but with his fathers help, they are making it. It's pretty bad for these folks.

It's a red state here, but most people I talk with are really PO'ed at this whole Iraq deal and with Bu$h. I've been looking for Bu$h bumper stickers and I haven't seen even one in about a month. I've been waiting for some of the churches to make a stand on Iraq. This is Georgia, but even so, I think we will begin to hear some churches make a stand against this war, now that Bu$h's reasons for starting this mess are being recognized as bogus. You know, it should be against the law to lie to start a war like these bastards in DC did.

I just want the kids to come home. Even some of the Repubs around here are beginning to want this too. My neighbor does and he is from Alabama, so you can guess what party he is. Sort of cognitive dissonance going on down here.

[tkmorris]

129. When a Young Rep touches an enlistment form.....

They burst into flames. No kidding, it's amazing. Try to hand them one sometime, you'll see :evilgrin:

[goodhue]

85. Doubling troops = more dead

Pullout = less dead

[K-W]

88. And Bush would just use the troops to invade Syria. EOM

[walldude]

89. Bullshit...

the only reason there is a fucking war there is because we are occupying their country. The absolute worst case if we pull out would be civil war and considering how poorly armed and equipped they are it couldn't be any worse than us dropping napalm on them.
Embolden the terrorists? Gimme a break, they are willing to die for their cause, nothing we do or don't do is going to embolden them any more than they are already...

[Jack_Dawson]

127. Then why do 403 congresspeople agree with me?

Including a shitload of Democrats. If you think pulling out now will transform Iraq into some kind of enchanted fairy tale of a place you're seriously smoking something.

[Ms. Clio]

133. Gosh before you were citing imaginary Iraqis to back up your opinion

Now you've moved on to something completely different,and utterly irrelevant. It's a pathetic and obvious ploy.

BTW, the latest polls indicate that over 80% of Iraqis want U.S. troops out of their country. So tell us again what "a lot of Iraqis" want, why don't you?

[NYC Liberal]

153. You mean all those Congresspeople who voted to get us in here in

the first place? Yeah, they are the epitome of good judgement when it comes to this war. :eyes:

And nobody said that leaving will "transform Iraq into some kind of enchanted fairy tale of a place." Not in the least. But it is none of our goddamn business if Iraqis decide to fight a civil war to sort out their problems, and we should not be sacrificing American lives getting involved in it. End of story.

[pinto]

157. (aside) That vote had really nothing to do with withdrawal, it was a ruse.

Check it out. It was a House slap fest that the Republicans set up as a red herring to avoid discussing Rep. Murtha's Resolution for a 6 month withdrawal...

*beats dead horse*

[liberalhistorian]

95. The problem with that is that

our very presence is what has emboldened the terrorists and drawn them to Iraq. And our very presence is what is driving the insurgency. I agree, though, that an incremental pullout would likely be better for the Iraqi people than a sudden, complete pullout. But a doubling of the troops? No, No, NO NO NO! That would only make things worse and dig us even deeper into the hole.

And just where do you expect those extra troops to come from? The military is already stretched far beyond what it should be, and the National Guard and Reserves are being used far more than many of them can handle, considering some units have been deployed twice and have been told to expect more. Unless you want the reinstatement of the draft, I don't see how you'd do it.

[mmonk]

96. Bill?

[No Exit]

97. "The terrorists"??

Those people fighting back--formerly called "insurgents"--are simply the PEOPLE OF IRAQ. See, they were invaded by a foreign army, and they're trying to expel the foreign army from their home. (Imagine US being invaded by a foreign army--you know darn well you'd be doing the same thing!)

Sure, there are "terrorists" there now. It's a wide open zone of chaos, and anywhere there's such a place, criminals and bad guys and opportunists and killers all flock to the place.

But the real people fighting are just the people who live there. I wouldn't expect them to do anything else.

We need to BUTT OUT.

[No Exit]

98. BTW, I'd like to take this opportunity to remind everyone to shop shop

shop for Christmas! If you don't get out there and spend lotsa money, THE TERRORISTS WILL HAVE WON!!

[Zhade]

103. Well, pick up a gun and go on over, Rambo.

NT!

[Telly Savalas]

108. I thought this thread was going to be about GOP family planning practices

Kind of a misleading title, eh? :shrug:

[Leopolds Ghost]

111. (Conan O'Brien voice) "Grrr arghhh! You beat me within seconds!"

(knocks over microphone in frustration, see #110) :evilgrin:

[Telly Savalas]

112. The sad thing is that I saw this thread last night...

and it took this long to think of it.

[Leopolds Ghost]

125. Forget Early Withdrawal... what's your position on the Rhythm method

The resolution put forward by Ed Rhythm, R-Alaska!

He proposes we stage a rapid reaction force and go in cyclically.

What did you think I was referring to silly :-)

[existentialist]

109. "This war is going to be decided

in the hearts and minds of the people that live there."

Lyndon Baines Johnson

He was correct on that point. He still is. Sending more troops means more targets, and more reasons for them to hate us; it probably has ever since Abu Graib broke at the latest.

Possibly things might have been different if we had behaved in a civilized manner when we first went in. Possibly, but it was still a baaaaaaaaad idea, and it gets worse every day.

[Leopolds Ghost]

110. Early Pullout = Sinful and Against the Will of God

For Southern Baptists, the Missionary Position is The only acceptable approach in Iraq.

The Barrier method is inadequate protection against Syria and also not countenanced.

Only Full Invasion and deposition of her head will pacify that country and marry it once again to the family of nations.

By exercising his familial duty, George W. will midwife a new nation in Iraq.

Call it le droit de seigneur.

[sidwill]

113. Also against a pullout

Look, this thing is a massive cluster fuck and GWB is SOLELY responsible. For that the citizens of this country have to demand accountability.

Unfortunately Bush has created a situation in Iraq that would become much,much worse if US troops pull out. Forget for a moment the rhetoric of terrorist/insurgent for a moment. Without some sort of authority standing between the various ethnic and religious factions the country will quickly descend into full blown civil war. This potentially could become the worst humanitarian disaster since rhawanda.

Basically we are boned any which a way we go, but at this point we can't allow a full blown civil war to occur.

Sorry but thats the way it appears to me.

[Jose Diablo]

117. Reasonable men could disagree

With all due respect, I do not agree that our presence in Iraq is helping the situation.

These people in Iraq have been handling their own affairs for at least, let me see, written history in this area goes back to about 2500bc. Thats 4500 years. And somehow we in in the west know what is best for them? Kind of arrogant of us don't you think?

They do not want us there. How can we think they do. Would anybody in our country want someone here that came in and bombed the crap out of us, then rolled in with tanks, took our people to prisons and tortured them, burned our most holy city with napalm and installed a puppet government?

They are capable of organizing however they want, without our help.

The best thing we can do at this point is just leave and let them sort it out for themselves.

Sure its broke, we broke it, but we cannot fix it. They are the only ones that can fix it. Our staying there is stopping them from fixing it the way they have done for thousands of years.

Civil War? Sure thats almost assured. But these people are civilized and it will sort itself out eventually. Our being there is not going to stop that or even delay it. Maybe there should never have been a country called Iraq to begin with, but they will decide this, not us or the British or some energy company conglomerate.

The corporatist put Bu$h in power, now they can deal with what their 'fortunate son' has done.

[sidwill]

151. I see things exactly as you do

Our continued presence doesn't help anyone especially ourselves, but a pullout IMO will result in a full blown civil war. That means open armed conflict between religious and ethnic groups, the Shiites will want their pound of flesh from the Sunnis (as will the Kurds) the Sunnis who have historically shown no aversion to killing civilians to further their interests will do so as well.

This violence will occur on a much, much larger scale IMO.

To be clear, I don't buy into the terrorism argument, I think that issue has more to do with rather small groups of dissafected religious zealots than any real mass movement. The problem in Iraq is different Bushco stupidly dismantled what societal infrastructure there was to at least alleviate a civil war, but now thats gone.

We leave and its a repeat of the former Yugoslavias descent in religious/sectarian violence.

The only idea that I can come up with that simultaneously protects Iraqi civilians and gets our guys out is a mea culps by our country to the UN and a gradual pullout/replacement of US troops with an international peacekeeping force primarily made up of Arab states.

Of course Bushie knows this as wel but will never admit that, lest he alienate all the fundy gun nut/bible thumpers who think the UN is (as Bobby Buchee's mama say) "the Devil".

[Jose Diablo]

155. I doubt the Sunnis, Shiites or the Kurds

will welcome even a UN peacekeeping force.

The way I see this going down is all 3 factions will go their separate ways. This isn't the worst of it though.

The Kurds will unite with the Kurds in Turkey and part of Iran to form a Kurdistan. Thus Turkey will be pissed too.

The Shiites will go with Iran, taking down the Emir of Kuwait in the process.

The Sunnis may try to form with Syria or maybe Jordan. They will have to team with someone because they have little resources in central Iraq. Being 'moderates' I'd say Jordan was a better fit, but who can say. Or they will be slaughtered by the Shiites, this could happen too.

It won't stop there either. The House of Saud is just barely hanging in there, the Shiites could throw off the Saudis and down goes another west 'friendly' country.

These PNACers have really screwed the pooch this time. Israel will be very lucky if they can survive. I'd say this whole deal was something the Iranians cooked-up with Chalabi, it smells Persian in it's subtleness. I think Iran played Bu$h for a chump.

The entire middle eastern map will be redrawn before the dust settles on this deal. We can be sure though, whoever ends-up in power over there, the United States will be their worst enemy, who could blame them? And they have very long memories in that part of the world.

We better get ready, all they have top do is change from petro-dollars to another currency and we are done, financially.

[occuserpens]

114. Do you want to kill the US Army once and for all?

<What I support is a DOUBLING of the troops to secure the borders>

This means that pretty much the whole US Army will be there!

[upi402]

116. put-in = dumb ass-ed

my opinion

[ulysses]

119. as if our being there disheartens the terrorists.

:eyes:

We need to bring our troops home now.

[Jack_Dawson]

160. So you're "for" Iraq being a terrorist training ground?

See...we're on the same side. I agree we should've never been there. But do you really think all hell won't break loose if we leave? C'mon now.

[ulysses]

163. I think all hell is going to break loose whether we leave or stay.

I used to be solidly in the "we broke it, now we have to fix it" camp, but even if we could fix it, we're not going to - the political will isn't there. We're not doing any good by being there. We need to go.

[okieinpain]

121. I agree, I know it's not a winning propositon around here, but we

created this mess, and I believe that we should clean it up.

[ulysses]

123. do you really think that it's within our power to fix Iraq?

[BigBearJohn]

124. As long as * is president, you could send 2 mil soldiers, and still lose

If you have a CEO that just lost 200 billion of your company's
money -- are you then going to give him another 300 billion to see if
he could do better THIS time?

If have a corrupt administration whose only purpose is to create chaos
so they can profit off of it, doubling our troops will only mean
doubling our losses and doubling THEIR profit. Nothing more.

[NNN0LHI]

130. Are the "terrorists" you speak of Iraqis who won't submit to our military?

Just curious about that.

Don

[Fescue4u]

131. Yes. Lets douse the fire with gasolene!

[AntiFascist]

142. Have you noticed that attacks on the troops are accelerating?

Have you noticed that 80% of Iraqis now want us out? What you are proposing will lead to civil war and quite possibly a full-on holy war. Have you noticed that Republicans are starting up the "we are fighting an ideology" rhetoric again? What do you think this really means to a right-wing Christian?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

143. You're absolutely correct...you DO "sound like Bill O'Reilly".....

...JMHO, but I think you've blown your cover.

[Douglas Carpenter]

146. -- you sound like LBJ in 1965 -- but let's consider what the Iraqi's want

polls of Iraqi public opinion:

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m17469&date=05-nov-2005_03:0
"Some polls have asked Iraqis specifically about the presence of U.S. troops, and guess what: they want us to leave. A February poll by the U.S. military, cited by the Brookings Institution, found that 71 percent of Iraqis "oppose the presence of Coalition Forces in Iraq." This poll was taken only in urban areas, but others have found much the same sentiment. According to a January 2005 poll by Abu Dhabi TV/Zogby International, 82 percent of Sunni Arabs and 69 percent of Shiite Arabs favor the withdrawal of U.S. troops either immediately or after an elected government is in place."
and this one is a from the British Ministry of Defense
link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/23/ixportaltop.html
"Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified - rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province;
• 82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops;
• less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security;
• 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;
• 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened;
• 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces."
_______________
Here another link regarding polls of Iraq opinion:
http://www.comw.org/pda/0501br17append.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Jon8503]

148. No More Troops; No More Troops

More troops are not the answer in an ill=conceived, unplanned, immoral unwinable war. You also have to have expert leadership to run the war. We have none of that as has been shown.

You need to have 100% of the, as you have heard, "hearts & minds" of the Iraqi people. We do not have that, You heard Murtha, they now see us as the enemy and a recent BBC poll shows that 80% of them want us out of their country. More troops will not help or change that attitude.

I only agree that we just don't pick up and go home but as Murtha who has said it best, we leave as soon as possible. Only then.

Unfortunately none of us can undo what Bush has done. I understand you as others have the theory we are there and we should try to salvage the war and with more troops could still win. I just cannot believe that would happen. It is a unwinable war.

[JCMach1]

149. Hell no, this is not winnable or sustainable

There is NO plan that will bring us victory.

Hell, I don't know if the people we have in Washington would even know how to envision victory. They have NO clue.

The arrogance of most of our politicos is basically going to match the opinion expressed here. The arrogance (read hubris) in Washington is that we CAN WIN.

It has been GAME OVER for some time. Let's take our quarters and go home.

[existentialist]

150. "The war is wrong--but we are in it.

"Well now, not even a burglar could have said that better."

Mark Twain

[laura888]

156. LOL! Excellent! n/t

[thebigidea]

161. the pro-war assholes were wrong before, so why should anyone listen now?

[Jack_Dawson]

164. Are you calling me an A*hole?

That's pretty simpleminded. I agree we should've never been there but wtf you think if we just up and leave everything will be hunky dory? C'mon now.

[thebigidea]

165. kinda funny that you didn't say "Are you calling me pro-war?"

are you a pro-war asshole? I'm guessing the answer is no. I was referring to all the prowar folks that were totally wrong about the invasion who are currently pushing this "oh we can't leave now, it'll be a disaster." They were wrong before, they have no credibility. I'll stick to listening to people who know the region and what they're talking about instead of the White Man's Burden Squad.