Posted on 11/24/2006 6:46:08 PM PST by kristinn
I'm reading an astonishing number of comments on Free Republic these days by posters who have joined the ranks of the anti-American left in calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Some claim to have military experience, some claim to be patriotic Americans and some claim to be smarter than the rest.
These posters are joining the Murtha-Rangel-McDermott treason caucus. Oh, they say they love the troops, but their decision to abandon them in the field speaks otherwise.
Three years ago, the United States led an international coalition to rid the world of one of the worst regimes on the planet. Saddam Hussein was an international terrorist: He financed terrorism, he trained terrorists and he harbored terrorists. He waged war on Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Israel. He waged war on the people of Iraq, including genocidal campaigns against the Kurds in the north and the marsh Arabs in the south.
Saddam successfully subverted the Oil-for-Food program and was wearing down support for continuing the sanctions keeping him in check.
He had numerous contacts with al Qaeda over the years. He tried to assassinate a former U.S. president. He maintained research capabilities to implement nuclear, chemical and biological weapons as soon as the sanctions were lifted. There is evidence that some of these programs would have been operational within a year even with the sanctions in place.
The decision to remove Saddam and his regime as part of the Global War on Terror was correct.
Three-and-a-half years after Iraq and the world were liberated from Saddam and his terrorist regime, there are those on Free Republic who are clamoring to give up, surrender, cut and run, stab the troops in the back, betray the Iraqis, betray our allies in the GWOT, spit on the graves of our fallen heroes and join Cindy Sheehan, Medea Benjamin and Ramsey Clark in bringing about America's defeat in the GWOT.
It's only been three-and-a-half years--only six months since the freely elected government in Iraq was formed. In that time, what has been called a mini-Marshall Plan of construction and reconstruction has come to fruition. The Iraqis have held three national elections, they have held numerous local elections, fourteen out of eighteen Iraq provinces are relatively peaceful and stable.
Six months ago, when the Iraqi government was formed, the experts said the war would be taken to Baghdad because our enemies in the region could not abide the example of a free, democratic society in the Middle East. For once, the experts were right. The battle of Baghdad has been a prolonged Tet Offensive style operation of headline-grabbing attacks intended to sap the morale of Americans and Iraqis alike.
From what I've been reading on Free Republic lately, a lot of Freepers have fallen for the enemy's ploy and are howling like barking moonbats for our immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Some of that talk is couched in talk of 'we're fighting a PC war like Vietnam!' The soldiers I met in Iraq recently told Debra Argel Bastian to pass on a message to the Vietnam vets criticizing the war: With all due respect to your service, this is not Vietnam. It is not being fought like Vietnam. Please let us finish our mission.
But our enemy is playing the Vietnam ploy to great benefit. They know they can count on the American and world media to broadcast their propaganda. They work with leftist Americans to sabotage the war effort at home. They know these leftist Americans have allies in the Democratic party. They know they do not need a military victory--only political and psychological victories are needed to defeat America.
You guys are playing right in to their hands. Congratulations.
There are those who argue that murder and dictatorship is the mindset of the Middle East and that will not be changed by our actions. Funny how those who smugly denigrate the Arab peoples' capacity for freedom forget the wholesale slaughter of millions of Westerners by Westerners at the hands of Western dictatorships just a few generations past.
I hear complaints that the Iraqis aren't standing up. Yet, to use one common example, when police recruits are slaughtered in bombings, Iraqis line up the next day at the same recruiting center. The insurgency is small in number, but they are able to do enough damage on a daily basis to stretch out the time it will take to secure the whole of Iraq.
At this time of our testing, the American people are starting to go wobbly. Sadly, many Freepers are too. Our troops and their Commander-in-Chief are not, thank God. It's only been three-and-a-half years. The progress made has been phenomonal. Throw in the towel now, and you'll just have the terrorists follow us home. Everyone knows that, including you. I'm not willing to pay that price, not now, not ever, but you are.
Let me close by offering similar sentiments recently offered by two men 'in the know' on the situation in Iraq who are not giving up. First, Kurdish Regional Government Prime Minister Barzani: "When I was in the United States recently and read the negative news in the Washington Post, New York Times and in the network TV broadcasts, I even wondered if things had gotten so bad since I had left that I shouldn't return."
Next, Gen. Abizaid: "When I come to Washington, I feel despair. When I'm in Iraq with my commanders, when I talk to our soldiers, when I talk to the Iraqi leadership, they are not despairing."
What choice do we have? We can not continue a war that without the support of the people.
Thank you, that is the first reasonable argument I've seen from the non-cowardly and non-liberal crowd ;) Iraq was going to end out a satellite of Iran as soon as we took out Saddam. It is shiite majority, and post-invasion it will be weaker. Unless we actualy take out Iran while we are at. Ironically, that might work better for nation building, because the Iranian youth are secularized.
2- Wrong target, Commander Bond, you should think of bombing Iran to get rid of their nuclear industry, Syria will fold thus preventing a Lebanese civil war and ending support to Hizballah, and definitely stop Iran from fooling around in Iraq.
I do support a Bush-I type job on Iran - don't overthrow the regime, but destroy much of the military and set their nuclear program back to square one. One of the downsides of Iraq is that this makes it much tougher to do this politically. The question is what would that do to your pro-life Senators?
Judging by your written English, you obviously can't understand it.
In addition, troll, when you mention somebody, you PING the person, got it?
Ah, yes, the old Ad Populous fallacy, appeal to the masses. The empirical evidence will be in the outcome. What exactly is the timetable you're relying on anyway? 6 months? 1 year? 3 years? I content that we need to give this experiment more time. A previous poster said 10 years, and that my friend is a fairly accurate assessment, in my opinion. BTW, I spent 7 years of my military career in Italy and Germany in the 1990s, 50 years after WWII ended. Just to put the past 3 years in perspective.
Which brings me back to my original point I made on this thread far upstream. We will not start carpet bombing Iraq, or killing massive amounts of people, not with a media and opposition party ready to cry bloody murder over it (as they have been), and a Supreme Court that says we have to give Geneva Convention rights to non uniformed terrorists who have committed war crimes against civilians.
We cannot just leave, because to all of the terrorists, the mullahs of Iran, the zealot muslims who want the Great Satan destroyed, THAT would be seen as an American defeat. They will then be emboldened in their hearts, such as they are, and plan far grander "defeats" to bring to us.
And McGovern is all the way up to 1972. :)
Just one. Here is my criteria for a good idea for Iraq:
1. Does not require Shiites and Suunis to learn to get along with each other. 2. Does not require a system of government as challenging as a democracy.
I'd be willing to support the plan to partition Iraq.
Well,a change in religion would be a good start, however, we here in Christian America still suffer from constitutional mis-fits most often dressed as Democrats, though they hardly hold a monopoly.
Don't take someone else's misinterpretation of my words and twist them even further.
roxy is very confused, melancholy. VERY confused.
Excellent! Thanks for the good read......
Be honest with yourself for a change. You are an anti-Semite.
You eliminate the outside threat, Iran and Syria. See #1851.
When you eliminate the outside threat you can have the Iraqi police, army, and government handle their own business. We will have a much smaller footprint and act as a referee with a big fist. The people will not want to kill us, save the usual nuts.
>>>As coalition policy reaches a crisis, may I resurrect an idea I have been flogging since April 2003? It offers a way out of the current debate over staying the course (as President George W. Bush has long advocated) or withdrawing troops on a short timetable (as his critics demand).<<<
>>>My solution splits the difference, "Stay the course – but change the course." I suggest pulling coalition forces out of the inhabited areas of Iraq and redeploying them to the desert.<<<
>>>This way, the troops remain indefinitely in Iraq, but remote from the urban carnage. It permits the American-led troops to carry out essential tasks (protecting borders, keeping the oil and gas flowing, ensuring that no Saddam-like monster takes power) while ending their non-essential work (maintaining street-level order, guarding their own barracks).<<<
>>>Beyond these specifics, such a troop redeployment would imply a profound and improved change of course. It means:<<<
• >>>Letting Iraqis run Iraq: Wish the Iraqis well but recognize…<<<
LOL!!!
There is but one of two ways to win. Carpet bomb them back to the early 19th century in capabilities or start wholesale killings. Neither is a fact the DEMs nor the GOP of today wants to face. The DEMs have no more FDR's and the GOP has no more Teddy Roosevelt's. These two despite their faults and successes understood war.
That leaves us having our troops left over there being sitting ducks because nobody in office has the fortitude in either party to tell their PC side of the party to go to hell and the well being of the troops come first. It should have done been over. PC is the sole reason it isn't and in a military manner.
The ones who do say as much about Iraq are quickly labeled barbarians by both parties Liberal hierarchy who sadly control both parties. Then the MSM gets their turn.
Well, then maybe I should avoid reposting your posts because that's exactly where I got the "bogus" information from.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/897451/posts?page=21#21
Yup, a troll is a troll is a troll!!
I won't copy what you wrote or mention ITS name so I don't have to ping IT.
After all, I already set the rules! LOL
This thread is for an asylum, a kooks’ magnet, no wonder I'm here! LOL
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.