Is it radical to hope that we don't succeed in Iraq?

[trumad]

We hear day in and day out from the Neocons that we embolden the enemy if we dare retreat.

But I ASK--- do we embolden the Neocons if we succeed?

Who are our true enemies?

[havocmom]

1. It's radical to think there is any defination of 'succeed in Iraq' (eom)

[TahitiNut]

6. 'Radical' would be a polite way of saying it.

:eyes:

[havocmom]

8. LOL Tryin to learn a little diplomancy in my old age

Not generally my natural impulse, I assure you! ;)

[madokie]

2. the bush* cabal

[Sammy Pepys]

3. Hoping we don't succeed in Iraq...

...is a position I don't think we should take publicly.

Does that win us any good will or convince people that we're better positioned to handle critical affairs like this if we hope for failure just to stymie our political adversaries?

[majorjohn]

4. If pulling out means we lost the war

then does that mean if we succeed, we should not pull out?

[tk2kewl]

5. If we could succeed at stabilizing the country and fostering a democratic government

that would be fantastic.

Why anyone would want to fail is beyond me.

That said, I think we are well past failure.

[pampango]

11. I think you get to the heart of the question. What does it mean

to succeed in Iraq?

While few of us would wish a new Saddam or a Taliban on the Iraqi people, there is an argument that a stable democracy in Iraq, as unachievable as that is at this stage in the fiasco, would embolden the US to remove foreign leaders in the future. Not to mention giving Bush a chance to crow.

My guess is that we have to hope for the best for Iraqis and realize that is unlikely to happen and prepare for the future.

[trumad]

15. embolden the US to remove foreign leaders in the future

and that is the Neocon doctrine.

[trumad]

12. But here's the thing

if that happened, we'd never leave... if you follow PNAC doctrine then it is obvious that their intention was to expand and own the Middle East.

[tk2kewl]

16. Well, I don't think we ever belonged there.

But to talk about rooting for failure is just silly to me. At this point we need to get out, see how things shake out and then make reparations.

[trumad]

17. I'm not rooting

but if we win--- won't we try it again?

[tk2kewl]

21. We'll probably elect some asshole who will try it again some day any way.

As far as trying it again in the near future "win" or "lose", I think (hope?) the American people and the world have had enough of this shit.

[TahitiNut]

28. It's a Catch-22 - a call for a perpetual military occupation.

Let's try to make what little sense out of this that can be found. All the rhetoric about "stabilizing" Iraq paints some vague picture of a US-friendly government in Iraq. That would be a government whose "friendship" was assessed by one common element, among others: an "invitation" for permanent military presence in Iraq! (After all, isn't that what makes Japan and Korea "friendly"?)

So, there we have it. The purported 'objective' is "business as usual" - Global Empire.

[Hamlette]

7. it is rational to be torn for the reasons you suggest:

it might lead this bunch of cons to start more wars.

On balance though, if Bush's dream of a liberal democracy flowering in Iraq could come true, I'd be fully on board for that win. Right now it doesn't look like that's possible.

[genie_weenie]

9. "Suceed in Iraq", "embolden our enemies", "supporting the troops

means supporting the mission" and all other of these carefully crafted bullet points are designed to place those who do not agree with the regime on the defensive.

Instead of a meaningful debate on the conduct of the occupation, the nature of government, morality of war, once those points have been introduced one has to weather the charge of "stabbing the troops in the back" and defend oneself from other outrageous personal attacks.

Debate over. You America Hater...

But, it is a sad day when it is considered radical to want an end to death and destruction.

[bryant69]

10. People who kill American troops are our enemy

I can't go along with this line of thinking. I hope we do succeed in Iraq for the sake of the dozens of American troops dying and the thousands of Iraqis dying and the hundreds of thousands that live in fear and deprivation. It's too steep a price to pay to wish for more suffering for them so we can defeat the neo-conservatives here at home.

That said, I don't think victory is actually possible.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[trumad]

14. But again--- if we succeed---we stay.

[bryant69]

18. I guess maybe we have different definitions of success?

What do you mean by success? Cause what I mean is Iraq becoming a stable secular Democracy where the various groups are able to feel protected and represented; Iraqi security forces (i.e. cops and soldiers) are able to handle the nations security. In that situation, we probably would continue to stay, in the same way that we continue to stay in Germany and Japan.

Again, before people start asking me stupid questions, I don't think this is actually possible.

Bryant

[TahitiNut]

30. Exactly. We stay until we "succeed" and stay.

Leaving isn't an option. So sayeth Global Corporatism.

[trumad]

31. I'm just saying that I'm glad the Neos weren't proven right...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

34. Says somebody from the South...

:shrug:

[irislake]

13. I for one

hope you get the hell out without stealing their oil or plundering that poor country more than you have done so far. The world seems to think that the motives of the Bush regime are totally immoral. It's not for nothing that the U.S is ranked third most dangerous government in the world. I don't agree. I think U.S. government is far more dangerous than Iran/Korea. Far, far, far. Should be ranked first.

[mmonk]

19. Succeed or not succeed at what?

Loaded question when we have a policy backed by lies to begin with.

[Straight Shooter]

20. We are run by a group of people who believe the ends justify the means.

Is that good or is that bad? Each person can answer for their own conscience.

As for myself, if "succeed" means the neocons continue to exploit an entire nation to satisfy their whims and greed, no, we should not succeed under that definition.

If "succeed" means the Iraqis finally react whereby they set aside their religious/cultural differences and find a way to extricate themselves from our grip, then yes, I hope we succeed because we have given them the impetus, albeit very maliciously induced, to become a strong nation unto themselves.

I don't think either scenario is likely. There will be no success or failure that can be objectively measured. It will continue to be a mess far into the future. JMHO.

[trumad]

23. I think your first scenario is the reason we went to war

and I think being taught a lesson in Iraq stopped them in their tracks.

[H2O Man]

22. Interesting thread.

I am unaware of any evidence that snakes like Feith had anything but a long, violent conflict between various Islamic factions as a goal. I do not believe that they had the least concern with how many poor and middle class American kids had to die or be severely injured in order for their plan to "suceed." I do not believe, in any sense, that the neoconservatives had/have our best interests in mind, much less the best interests of the Iraqi population.

I would hope that we could have new leadership that would help to bring stability to Iraq. I do not think that can be accomplished by keeping the US military there. I do not think that it is patriotic for people in Washington to put our soldiers in harm's way in this war.

[TwilightGardener]

24. If succeeding means that wars of choice are looked at as a worthy

and noble thing to do, I'd rather not term our involvement there as a success. I don't want Iraq held up as a model of how Iran can be "transformed" by the PNACers. That said, I do want a stable country left in our wake. These people deserve not to live in endless chaos and misery. We owe them that. It all depends on how we Americans end up viewing this war--if the American people feel overall that it wasn't worth the blood and treasure, despite stability, we shouldn't be in any danger of the neocons trying to use the example of Iraq to further their goals, although they would still have won in terms of having permanent bases/oil revenues there. This is why '08 is so critical--gotta keep Rudy McRomney, Huckabee, Thompson, and whoever else the neocons are pushing out of the WH.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

37. Sometimes they are.

Kosovo was a war of choice. Intervening in Darfur would have been purely a war of choice.

[onenote]

25. so if you are not hoping for "success" (whatever that means) what are you hoping for?

What would you like Iraq to look like 6 months from now, a year from now, and five years from now?

[trumad]

26. An Iraq with no US Soldiers

How's that for starters?

[onenote]

29. that would be nice, but are you saying you don't care about the iraqis?

Or that it doesn't matter whether a post-occupation iraq poses a threat?

To be clear, I think we've taken a manageable situation that posed a minimal threat and turned it into a freaking horrorshow and that we should never have gone in. I'd like us out asap. But I continue to struggle with the concept that an unstable, civil war ridden iraq is something that I shouldn't care about.

[lectrobyte]

27. If by succeed, you mean take control of the oil and leave the

country in shambles and the people in chaos, then I don't think that hoping that doesn't happen is too radical.

[mahina]

32. Pray we succeed, for the men and women who serve.

It's ludicrous to consider hoping for defeat in this misbegotten, ill-planned, ill-conceived, abortion of a war we were lied into. God forbid.
Acknowledge that the chances of success are slim, and work to redeploy outside of this botched mess and ending it, while praying for our men and women in uniform.
No Democrats I know hope for failure, that is absurd.

[EFerrari]

33. It's too late. Iraq is lost. n/t

[mahina]

35. Pray God really does have a word with the blivet.

If God really spoke to him, as * claims he does, God will have a thing or two to say I would expect.
or some lightening might do the trick. ZOT.

[blues90]

36. The bush kabal and the neocons are our enemy

Plus the mainstream media is our enemy and their enabler .

We can talk all you want about how we got in Iraq but now that this is a bit late and many lives to short we have to somehow get the hell out of there .

Trouble is we really don;t know how bad things are going in Iraq because we have no view of it , we do know it's bad and wrong .

There is no way of knowing what will happen if we pull out and no way of knowing what will happen if we stay in . Either way there will be more death and destruction .

Ideally we could turn this entire 6 years back and hope such an insane thing never happens again .

As an american I am sickened by the entire state of things , from one end to the other there is nothing good to come out of this , either in Iraq or here in the USA . We have a surreal world now , nothing is what it appears to be . NOTHING !

[Donald Ian Rankin]

38. I think that for most definitions of "success" that's a deeply misguided position.

I think most definitions of "success" hinge on the creation of a stable, peaceful, prosperous, democratic state in Iraq.

I don't think that's achievable, but I do think it would be wonderful if it were, and I think that refraining from achieving it if there were a way to do so just because it would help the neocons would be ununtterably contemptible.