Posted on 09/20/2004 10:47:56 AM PDT by COURAGE
By the way, why are these threads on Novak's article (and don't forget George Will's article) being pulled?
The Republican Party is all about debate. The greatness of the conservative movement is that we have neo-cons, classic cons, paleocons, etc. We need to have a debate on how this administration should proceed on Iraq.
The hard truth that the "fight to victory" types refuse to recognize is that the "coalition of the willing" is going to disintegrate next year. Democracies cannot keep their sons in battle without the support of the boys at home and thanks to Iraq, Berlusconi, Blair, and Howard are in trouble. Aznar is already gone.
I'm not buying any of this - Bush wins re-election, then he pulls out of iraq? Iran would be the big winner, they would control even more oil supplies.
I've seen this one elsewhere today.
Good story line, though.
We should leave Iraq and go pound of Iran for a bit. Makes more sense. Let them rebuild themselves.
No. The "fight to victory" types are unwilling to give up our fight because other countries are doing so. We must win this war.
...also classic to leak a trial balloon to the press.If the Kerry camp comes out for leaving soon then Bush just points to another in a long line of Kerry Flip Flops. If Kerry says he would stay ,Bush just states that he had every intention of staying and Kerry has just another Me Too Moment in his 15 minutes....Classic Rope a Dope...
Lemme make sure I have this right...
The Bush administration, after winning the election, is going to remove it's presence from the centerpiece of it's entire mid-east strategy?
This is certainly something a RAT would do but not a principled Republican....and Bush is a principled Republican.
The debate is over .. the Senators all signed a piece of paper saying the President could proceed.
Now .. they're not happy how he's proceeding .. TOOOOOO LATE.
The American public has accepted that the neoconservative vision of a pro-American, democratic Iraq where cheering crowds welcome American troops with flowers was delusional. They are not willing to pour blood and treasure seeking a delusional definition of "victory".
Of course. We are willing to make every sacrifice needed to win a real victory. Just because some paleos can't imagine the U.S. winning doesn't mean it won't happen.
Novak’s source for this story is trying to confuse Kerry/Edwards on there “secret plan theory” There is no way W is pulling out without Victory but if this story gets into the mainstream then the Kerry message of W’s secret plan is muddled even if it is probably true. If Bush gets a mandate I bet he will add an extra 100,000 troops to clear out Falluhja, Ramadi…..ect and protect the polling stations in January.
The Paleo-Arab faction weighs in. Novak conveys his OWN point of view; its the NEO-Cons fault!
Am I wrong or has Novak's administrative sources been consistantly wrong lately?
Has it ever dawned on the "fight to win" crowd that Israel has spent 40 years seeking "victory" over the Palestinians ? And now they are abandoning Gaza and will abandon the cities of the West Bank and hunker down behind a fortress wall ? Please explain to me what you will do that Israel did not.
Israel has accepted that it can win battlefield victories but it cannot rule large hostile Arab populations at any acceptable cost. Neither can we.
And where exactly would those 100,000 troops come from ? You never addressed that question. Do you seriously believe that the American people will wish to pour more blood and treasure into Iraq if they see the Europeans pulling out ? No they will not. In the run up to war Bush needed Blair's political support. If the American people see the British bailing do you think they will wish to stick around ?
No. The American people do not wish to cut and run but that most assuredly does not mean that they are willing to lose 10 Americans a week stretching forever. That does not mean they are willing to pour endless amounts of money into the pursuit of a pipedream. There is a point at which you cut your losses.
But, that is sort of meaningless. Israel's fight against the PA and our rebuilding efforts in Iraq are extremely different. Leaving Iraq in its current state would just bring about another threat to the US. We cannot "leave" yet.
In this war, that is the point where we admit defeat. And subsequently die.
LBJ and Nixon got out of Vietnam not because of the protestors, but because the cost of the war was sending inflation through the roof.
Can we afford the cost of neoconservative land wars across the Mid East ? No we can't.
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.