A Message to All the Cut and Run Freepers Currently Polluting Free Republic

Friday, November 24, 2006 | Kristinn

[devolve]

Thanks Dixie!

Impossible to refute actual photographs and exact quotes

Jon Carry? Nixon?

[ARealMothersSonForever]

What does Robert Gates bring to the table, as far as enhancing our ability to prosecute this war, leading to a victorious outcome in Iraq?

Robert Gates brings a kindler, gentler get the h3ll out strategy. Sorry to be the one to break the news. This is why the neocons are all in a snit and torching everyone in sight. Worry not, we will maintain enough presence to delight the media with a monthly body count......

[rlmorel]

"...This tired argument that somehow because we are fighting sunnis and shiites in Iraq alqueda has less capability to strike the U.S. never had any logic behind it. It took only twelve men to topple the towers and kill 3000. Does anyone really think that alqueda cannot find another twelve because they are all fighting in Iraq. This is senseless and is a poor argument for "staying the course" in Iraq...."

I disagree.

What happened on 9/11 took planning, coordination, communication and money. It is difficult to plan, coordinate, communicate or effectively raise money when your top leaders are continually taken out, and we have found them and taken them out.

Additionally, Al Queda itself has admitted not only that Iraq is indeed the battleground to fight for, but that they are demoralized by defeats and hardships that have been imposed on them due to the US Military taking the fight to them.

[wku man]

Yep...it's like the UN condemning Israel for her "disproportionate" use of force against hezbollah this summer. The nature of warfare has not changed, nor will it ever change. Wise people will always want to go in with a sledge hammer to crush a mosquito. Gets it over with quickly, with the least possible expendature of blood and treasure.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[swheats]

Thank you Krisinn for reminding us why we are fighting and the reason we CAN NOT withdraw from Iraq.

You need a bull horn and a larger platform to get this message out.

[The Old Hoosier]

Would the Iraqis have had the wherewithal to use poison gas again, as they did to save themselves in the war in the 80's?

Maybe, I don't know. I don't think the Iranians would know either, which would sort of be the point.

[Txsleuth]

bttt

[demsux]

It's not what we do. In WWII we could have taken and held as our own nearly any territory we occupied, but we didn't. We gave it back to the people who attacked us, and whose butts we kicked. It is the American way.

And to be quite honest, I don't understand why we don't "colonize" what we conquer, if attacked first. Seems like a good way to avoid another attack on our soil!

[wku man]

But, but, but...I thought it was "the religion of peace"! You mean, they don't think the same as us?!?

/sarcasm

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[rlmorel]

No, I don't doubt it for one single second that they would use a nuclear weapon if they they could.

If they were willing to kill 20,000 people in one day (their admitted target figure) why should we think they might get queasy about 100,000 or a million dead?

[Young Scholar]

Would leaving now (obviously, it would be a phased withdrawal, but something that began very soon) be "cutting and running"? As NapkinUser put it very well in #104, our primary objectives have been accomplished; there is now little danger that Iraq is in any position to develop WMDs, so the threat has been dealt with.

Yes, Iraq is not yet a stable democracy, but many people doubt whether Iraq can ever become a stable democracy*, no matter what level of intervention we attempt. Nation-building was not the primary objective, so would we be "accepting defeat" if we leave before it is accomplished? Hardly.

*Traditionally, it has been conservatives who have questioned whether our country should be engaged in nation-building, and many question whether it is even possible in non-Western countries like Iraq. Foreign policy liberals, beginning with Woodrow Wilson, have advocated such policies, but I think it is far from clear that this approach is best.

[gusopol3]

I don't know the borders are wide open the last time I checked.

I know. I wish Bush saw this as the threat we do; but he's risked a lot on the strategy of NSA surveillance, so they must have some idea to put their eggs in that basket as far as protecting soft targets.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Back off Jack! Many of us on here have THE SOLUTION, but are never considered or listened to. We don't need a pullout, we need a complete mop up operation with no mercy. To continue like it's going is insane.

When this administration and especially the Democrats finally find out the HARD WAY that we're right -- then at that time perhaps YOU too will understand. Get a life.

[gusopol3]

very dull point.

[The Old Hoosier]

This tired argument that somehow because we are fighting sunnis and shiites in Iraq alqueda has less capability to strike the U.S. never had any logic behind it. It took only twelve men to topple the towers and kill 3000. Does anyone really think that alqueda cannot find another twelve because they are all fighting in Iraq. This is senseless and is a poor argument for "staying the course" in Iraq.

Thank you for pointing this out. A lot of FReepers need to hear it.

[I see my hands]

"Is it too much to type President Bush, instead of just Bush?"

Easier still would be W. But they've probably removed the key from their keyboards. Like the Clinton gang.

[RobbyS]

The British were not about to achieve it even after ten years in Iraq.

[rlmorel]

There are some who think we SHOULD just colonize, but I do believe in the concept of "American Exceptionalism".

We ARE different. We could have kept Japan and Germany after WWII, but we didn't. (who would have taken them from us?)

However, our military footprint in Iraq may indeed be a way to, in effect, "colonize" the area. I don't really think that is a bad idea, either. We may need that footprint there in the not so distant future.

[RegulatorCountry]

"the left has to come up with a whole new bunch of lies instead of recycling the old rumsfeld ones?"

So, in other words, it's just political?

[The Old Hoosier]

Whatever that means. All I'm saying is that you're less likely to invade if you think you might get gassed. I was very afraid for our boys when it looked like they might get gassed during the invasion.