Posted on 11/08/2004 9:37:29 AM PST by tpaine
IMHO, (and those of several Army officers I know) our strategey is NOT to get Iraq into a stable government right away, although that is one of the long term goals. Our goal is to send a message to the world that if you want to fight the U.S., Iraq is the place to go. We are letting our well trained and well equipped young men and women destroy the terrorists far away from US soil.
Osama would have just loved to plan and carry out a terrorist attack against the US but the truth is that he doesn't have the money or men to do it.
It sends another clear message as well, we don't care what the UN and EU think, we WILL go wherever necessary and do whatever necessary to secure our nation's safety. YOU could be next.
Bottom line: anyone who disagrees that we MUST be doing what we are doing in Iraq doesn't understand why we're waging war there.
The Iraq War is about much more than "democracy" and it's certainly not about anything "altruistic" or the spreading of "Americanism"....or anything like that.
Iraq is about removing a hostile regime that was terrorist-friendly, and rooting out and exterminating radical Islamic extremists who want nothing more than to kill as many Americans as possible -- and as many other "infidels" along the way -- and who will stop at NOTHING to achieve their goals. That's why President Bush labeled them as one of the "Axis of Evil". He did it and he damn well meant it.
Not enough people fully understand this -- and if they had access to just a fraction of the intelligence our President does, they would only partially comprehend.
As much as people on both sides don't want to admit it, President Bush and his team of advisors are VISIONARIES who fully understand the long-term implications of failing to act when absolutely necessary.
Many would rather we have reactionaries like clinton -- who, through his disatrous leadership failures, is directly to blame for the extent of our enemies' abilities to gather and strengthen.
They can paint it any color they want, but all of the above is absolute FACT.
As far as I'm concerned, let the New York Times scream about the fanatical "religious right" for the next four years to their heart's content if it makes them feel better. They're only talking to the Hollyweirdos and the upper-west side Manhattanites in the bagel shops who already agree with every word they're reading.
Fair enough. File in the FReeper thesaurus with "beeber" and "stuned".
Unity: "grat chowder for the MSM"
I expect elections in Iraq by January 2005 and relative calm by January 2006. I expect us to still have troops on the ground in both Afghanistan and Iraq (and Qatar, Yemen, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Uzbekistan) by the time the mid-terms roll around.
And it wouldn't surprise me if we aren't fully engaged in the next country that harbors terrorists or comprises the axis of evil.
I'm getting a pretty good feel for politics, but I don't think the American voting population is going to let themselves be hoodwinked into thinking this should all be over in time for the next election.
How about it, tpaine?
Cutie, do you have family serving over there, or are they retired?
I'm an Air Force brat, myself. Spent a dozen years moving from hither to yon.
Perhaps Norquist wants more fundraisers and events with members of CAIR and other terrorist-supporting groups?
They are still in morning or on a binder. I noticed how the unAmerican nonConservative has started carrying justine raimondo's anti-American BS. He/she's finally found an American distributor...there goes Pravda's monopoly on hatred towards America.
That is not "neo-conservatism" --whatever that means. It is only wisdom.
The whole rationale of the Ostend Manifesto, which the United States Government repudiated more than 150 years ago.
Old idea, knocked down and left behind. Robber-chieftain reasoning.
Watch what Bush does. That is what great powers do. We will defeat the insurgents coming from outside the country, then allow the Iraqis to determine their own future.
The Assyrians invented that policy, and they haven't lived down the reputation it earned them even after 28 centuries. They stank then and were reviled by humanity, and their memory still stinks. The fall of Nineveh in 612 BC is still one of the beacon events of human history.
>>>"My guess is that he'll set up permanent military installations along the Irani border, far from the Iraqi civilian population, and he'll let the Iraqis run their own country after the election in January."
This would be great. But he needs to get it done before mid-term elections. If we're still Falluja-tating then, it will be "quagmire" time for the elections. In fact, the timing is more like 1 year.
I'm all for partitioning into 3 pieces and then doing the base deployment in remote Iraqi territory.
Just partition, declare victory, withdraw to remote bases, and if things get out of whack, go in and fertilize and water every 5 years, if needed.
There are more problems than just Iraq.
Hoppy
Ten seconds ago you were comfortable with transporting entire populations against their will, out of your own discretion, for your own convenience.
Now you won't even admit that the other fellow might like to enjoy a right to maintain his boundaries and his "comfortable" arrangements, for his own convenience.
You're a little inconsistent in the application of a principle.
Oh, wait -- you don't have a principle. I forgot, you're the great robber-chief who would lead us abroad to go a-briganding for blood and plunder.
Well, that's already been done. And anyway, it's not in our scoping document, which see.
Hmmmmmmmm.......
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.