I'm with Koch - sayonara !
I agree. We've done our part. Let's get out.
Let's get the elections done, the Iraqi military spooled up-to-speed and get the hell out of there.
We kick-started Iraqi freedom with a great victory. It is now time for Iraqis to secure their own future.
Perhaps we should turn right and visit Iran next?
Viva Bush!
Agreed. We need to get the troops ready for Iran and Syria.
I believe Pres. Bush is thinking along the same lines and will remove the troops, or most of them, at the earliest possible date.
It is refreshing to see someone, anyone, offer up suggestions for consideration, as opposed to the negative self-serving diatribes offered by the minority party.
With that kinda strategy I am surprised either one of them had ANY children...
I've always held the position of Novak..........some cultures are just not ready for a Jeffersonian Democracy..
Well, duh! As if the Pres wants to stay longer than is needed?
His goal was to remove Saddam and Sons, who had not lived up to their surrender agreement, with their billions for WMD, the M.O. to use them, or give them away, and give 25 million souls a chance at a civilized society, who had suffered under a "containment" policy that was not working, and was about to be removed.
Cheney, Rumsfled and Rice could not agree more, and they will say it within the proper timetable and with the proper diplomacy.
WMD or not, we had more than enough justification to remove Saddam and I supported the prez on this. However, I'm not as compassionate as the prez and am not sure I agree that spilling our blood to save people who will in the end (no matter what), end up hating us anyway just for being infidels. I also realize we can't just kick a$$ and run, but I'm sure ready for us to depart as soon as we can.
It's a little late to declare victory...
If we get out now, IRAN will just get that much bigger and more powerful. The Iranian Pasdaran agents are all over Iraq making sure their terroist power base expands upon our departure. We can not afford to just "get out" in order to please those who despise us in Western Europe.
How about Japan or Germany? Why the haste? Piano piano!!. The job ain't over yet.
I think they are both wrong. We stuck out the occupations of Germany and Japan and we should do the same with Iraq. We can only leave when we know we will not leave a power vacuum.
Let's announce the end of crime and dismiss all police forces
Are these the same folks who criticized us for allowing Saddam Hussein to murder the folks in the south who fought against him in the first war?
Shame on Koch. Guess he agreed with Clinton that Rwanda wasn't worth our efforts either.
As for Ruddy, I have no clue as to where he is coming from.....but I have a hunch.
Here's a novel idea => instead of allowing everyone and their brother vote on what we should do, especially all the extreme brave "armchair generals" here in the States, why not ask what the commanders and troops in the field think.
They know what they face and how best to "attack" the problem. If they believe they can win the fight to passive Iraq once and for all, then we, the citizens who fund them to protect us, should give them what they want and ALLOW them the freedom of movement to win. And by God, we should stand up in unison and support them when they must do some damned nasty things. War is a miserable business, so the sooner we can produce the outcome our troops desire, the better all will be.
This constant harping on every nuance does nobody any good. Personally, I like to see all the blowhards in the Democratic Party strapped to our fighting vehicles to be used as RPG shields. The bloody hotair contained within one of them is probably more effective than any reactive armor we currently use.
Support those in the field, as they have been trained to make the right decisions on our behalf!
From 1950-1991 we had a large, draftee military well suited to occupation duties, but lacking the advanced weaponry (and the political leadership) necessary to force military campaigns to a quick conclusion (hence Korea and Vietnam). Today we have a leaner, meaner "expeditionary" military designed for "blitzing" opponents into submission, but lacking the raw numbers necessary to truly pacify any country of considerable size (that doesn't speak Spanish). I believe that "Iraqi-ization" is well under way, and I fully understand the Administration's concern with not setting "date certain" for withdrawal, but I am even more convinced that there are other fronts on which we will sooner or later be called to fight, and that we need to give our troops some down time and our equipment some much needed maintenance. Pulling back in Iraq doesn't have to mean pulling out, nor does it necessarily preclude conducting military operations in Iraq in support of either the War on Terror or the new Iraqi government.