I do not think that the Iraqis or the world are prepared to watch what happens when Dems and insurgents accomplish the mission of getting US troops out of Iraq asap.
If they think the TV is ugly to watch now...just imagine watching Baghdad turn into 1980's Beirut. Imagine watching tens or even hundreds of thousands of people dying. Imagine watching hundreds of thousands or millions fleeing. And imagine trying people trying to convince themselves that abandoning the Iraqi people to terrorist insurgents was a good thing to do.
This is the difference between chess players and checkers players.
One person is calling for a British troop pullout and suddenly the war's over and everybody's going home? Yeah, right.
Nice article. Where's the link?
Link?
The British General in question is known to be too political and left leaning in his politics. The British soldiers in iraq are said to be very upset with his comments and disagree all the way up the chain of the command. It is being rumored he is going to be replaced because of playing politics.
IBTZ
The 1990-2006 War in Iraq might soon be over. Bill Clinton had our troops there for 8 years? News to me.
Should be in blogs...
This is an overly simplistic view of the issue. Bush #41 didn't "fear the results" at all -- he knew the results . . . which is why his position was thoroughly consistent with the strong public stand (adamant opposition to the use of military forces to engage in "nation-building") taken by Governor George W. Bush when he was running for the White House in 2000.
As far as this issue is concerned, Bush 41 looks more brilliant by the day.
WAYR?
I'm just a tad skeptical of an article with no link that ends with a quote from John Kerry.
On the transcripts of those interviews Mr Blair said: "I agree with every word of it."
"He sets in proper context what he is actually saying. What he is saying about wanting the British forces out of Iraq is precisely the same as we're all saying. Our strategy is to withdraw from Iraq when the job is done."
Mr Blair said when Sir Richard talked about the troops' presence exacerbating problems in Iraq, he thought he was "absolutely right".
"I've said the same myself, in circumstances where the Iraqis are ready to take over control of areas and we're still there."
In places like Basra, the presence of British troops was still "absolutely necessary", he said.
Mr Blair told the press conference he had received a "report" about the Daily Mail article on Thursday night, and Sir Richard was "plainly not" saying that troops should be withdrawn from Iraq now.
A spokesman for the Iraqi president said the departure of multi-national troops now "would be a disaster".
Mr Blair said he "suspected" Sir Richard had given a long interview with the Daily Mail, and that some of his comments had been taken out of context.
And so they had.
Ivan
Idiotic
While not willing to take the time to read the article, why would somebody post an article without comment? Posting articles without comment is a useless exercise since anybody can read the article whether it is posted or not. The point is discussion, but an initial comment might start discussion of the topic rather than reading techniques.
For anyone who doesn't want to read the article, here is the author's point.
Maintaining public opinion is vital for prosecuting a war in our republic. The best weapons and the toughest training can't propel the military to victory, when the public gives up.
That might look like where the blame stops, but it's just the beginning. The majority of American people aren't anti-war, by any means. Most people understand history, and recognize that violence can solve problems. If the average American is losing confidence that this is one of those situations, then those concerns will end the war.
The folks at NPR are scratching their collective cone heads today as to how the British commander could back pedal, as if he might have been pressured by Blair. It doesn't occur to them that perhaps the commander was misquoted in the first place. I reckon that's a matter they'd rather not look into.
This is not a terribly complicated business but it isn't exactly straightforward, and it is complicated by the fact that persons with a vested interest in doing so will proclaim it a defeat no matter what we do. Iraq partitioning itself is not a defeat if it's the choice of that government. Victory does not consist in our getting everything we want or establishing a utopia. Neither is possible.
Go to the page:
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/10/army_strong.html
Click on the video. Watch it.
You're full of shit.