Posted on 05/21/2004 9:28:19 AM PDT by americanbychoice2
The RAT leaning press will paint this in the most unfavorable terms possible for the President (and given the Abu Ghirab mess the President will not have as much leverage to protect US soldiers from this emerging Kangaroo court as he did a few months ago).
Still, I think it is the right thing to do. The Euroweenies aren't capable of conducting these missions on their own and they would probably come crawling (its what they're good at after all) back in a few months. But the media would not give the President any credit.
Oh, Pardon me. Iraq is a glowing success and everything is going according to plan.
Keep your rose colored glasses on.
Irak is an effing disaster. A study in incompetence.
It's not the media, it's the facts. Open your eyes.
America has lost Iraq. Now it's a bug out at any cost.
Whatever it becomes, it won't be considered a success.
Pull all of our troops out from Bosnia and Kosovo (we should have never been there in the first place), and Germany. That will be more than enough to take care of Syria. ;)
I don't think it means an end to US participation in the UN. With all this garbage going on in Iraq and the prisons...the UN is probably thinking that war crimes cases are necessary...and with nations like France and Germany voting...it will likely take that direction. But for any major event to occur in the Balkins again (which is beginning to look very possible), or in any other region of the world...the UN has no one that can step in immedately with 50,000 troops within two weeks. For the French...it would take them six weeks to deploy 15,000 troops...and thats the best you can hope for. The UN will likely think about how bad they really need the US military power and then pick out a better answer. If we prosecute these guys correctly...there is no need for war crimes cases.
You do not have any facts - you have you silly, self important opinions. And no we have not lost Iraq. Go back to DU where you belong.
You have chosen poorly.
Chosen what?
Or is only one viewpoint allowed.
How about if I say that those who stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the end of Dubya's wonderful Arab adventure are the unpatriots, refusing to see what's in front of their eyes.
I've supportted withdrawing from the UN for a while; the whole UN is a scandal.
I became disillusioned with the UN after listening to former Senator Helms ask a few questions about the UN. The UN has been a corrupt boondoggle for a long time.
I would hope that this Administration has better sense then to compromise on our Soldiers rights. Because If they do, it's political suicide, might as well not even run in the upcoming election.
OH, I'm trembling. I'm skulking off to DU with my tail between my legs.
Can't you come up with something more original than that?
Pitiful.
>>you have you silly, self important opinions
As opposed to your altruistic and wisdom laden taunts like go back to DU!
I stand stunned by your brilliance.
Perhaps a stint with the CPA is suitable for you. How much worse could you make conditions in Irak?
Not lost Iraq? We lost it the day we choked in Falluja.
The UN ceased to exist as a legitimate organization when it allowed the Communist Chinese to usurp the seat that the Nationalist Chinese originally possessed. This gave the Communists two major vetoes (Russia and China) and two minor ones (France and Britain) on the Security Council. The UN has gone relentlessly downhill ever since.
As long as the Bush administration is taking this approach, I think it is only fair to reinstate Michael New to his position in the U.S. military and pin about 15 pounds of medals on him for his steadfast refusal to serve under a U.N. command.
Me thinks that Germany and Spain are getting a bit head strung if the belive they can threaten to VETO in th UNSC!!
Are you French or Spanish?
R you a Moron or an Idiot?
You have a lot of company. Most of us despise the UN.
I admit, I've wondered the exact same thing about Fallujah. Did we wisely refuse pursue the insurgents because the cost in civilian deaths and destruction wasn't worth it, which could increase support for us among ordinary Iraqis? Or in the eyes of the Iraqis did we blink and back down, thereby encouraging insurgents and making ordinary Iraqis mad because we failed to deal decisively with insurgents?
Truthfully, I'm not even sure what is happening now in Fallujah. I haven't come across any news that the ex-Baathist commander of the Fallujah has imprisoned or at least driven out the foreign fighters who were shooting at our Marines. It seems likely that we're going to let the Iraqis handle it. That is our goal, to hand over control of the country to Iraqis, so why not start there? But I know it's not that simple since there are so many factions that would take control by force and prevent genuine elections.
I doubt if we'll know for a long time whether we did the right thing.
Thanks for clarifying that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.