Posted on 11/24/2006 6:46:08 PM PST by kristinn
I only dream about humans.
I agree. I think I'll have a little of that myself. :-)
--And socialism didn't fail so much as it was never really tried.--
Apples and papayas. Socialism is a utopistic ideology; the neocon plan was a regional strategy. BTW, if socialism is properly disguised and the sheeple accept it, it can flourish (as in many U.S. public schools).
Prayers are important. And so is telling ourselves the truth. Iraq is a big mess right now. Change is required. The election has mandanted that. That's why Rumsfeld resigned. That's why President Bush's poll numbers are so low and have been so low.
It's time to take a sober look at the Middle East and what can really be accomlished there. In Jordan they have a strong man - a king - but he is not a butcher - perhaps a benign dictator in Iraq will work? - perhaps a loose federation of three autonomous regions - so that the Sunnis, the Shia and the Kurds are not expected to suddenly become saints and get along with each other - but each will live separately in a country that is called Iraq? Perhaps there are other answers.
But the bottom line is that change is now required. And we need to re-assess what is possible. My goal is that we leave Iraq as a better place than it was and a place that is not a breeding ground for terrorists. And importantly, that we leave Iraq a place where the Iraqis can find meaningful work, and raise their families safely and have rewarding friendships.... in other words a place where the Iraqis can do the kinds of things that people everywhere want to do.
Great Post!
Thanks
There are dictators all over the world who were/are worse than Saddam. Do you support invading those countries too?
BTW, there have been far too many unpublicised terrorist acts pre-empted to pretend AQ and other Islamic extremeist operatives haven't nor are very busy in efforts to deploy unconventional weaponry to ignore the intelligence indicators.
Do you have documentation of any AQ attack using Iraqi WMDs, either before or after the war?
If you choose to play along the rather inept socialist media campaign to discredit anything supporting the GWOT, then remain myopically absorbed on GW Bush and the Iraq Campaign. The situation is dynamic and that basically is old business.
Huh??? I consider the daily killing and maiming of our boys in Iraq to be of prime concern to everyone, not just "old business".
Other than the media, that is.
Then give me proof that Rumsfeld resigned because of the 'mandate' to change in Iraq..........with links, please.
Before we go on, you need to back up your assumptions with facts.
I read every word of your post - excellent. Then, I read the replies and I can tell some never really read what you posted. I happen to agree with you - as does my nephew, who is in Iraq.
It's time to take a sober look at the Middle East and what can really be accomlished there. In Jordan they have a strong man - a king - but he is not a butcher - perhaps a benign dictator in Iraq will work? - perhaps a loose federation of three autonomous regions - so that the Sunnis, the Shia and the Kurds are not expected to suddenly become saints and get along with each other - but each will live separately in a country that is called Iraq? Perhaps there are other answers.
But the bottom line is that change is now required. And we need to re-assess what is possible. My goal is that we leave Iraq as a better place than it was and a place that is not a breeding ground for terrorists. And importantly, that we leave Iraq a place where the Iraqis can find meaningful work, and raise their families safely and have rewarding friendships.... in other words a place where the Iraqis can do the kinds of things that people everywhere want to do."
BRAVO! A poignant, clearheaded and articulate statement. The above you penned should have its own thread, not Kristinn's "YOU WILL NOT QUESTION HOW BAD THINGS ARE IN IRAQ - IF YOU DO YOU ARE A TRAITOR" nonsense.
The problem is that no one said that. leadpenny just made that up.
We agree on everything pretty much, though I'd be more inclined to do a pull back to the Kurdish region (cut&run???), let the shia/sunni/insurgents/tribal nuts expend their revenge. It wouldn't take long and the mop up would be swift and easy. The Kurds are the only stable entity in Iraq, play on it.
The only thing I can add, and I see it said alot so your not alone, the "fighting them there, so we don't fight them here", just isn't a long term strategy. Our Country IS NOT secure, by any stretch of the imagination. Unless we are willing to launch total devastation on the muslims at large, we are not going to kill enough of them in Iraq to prevent attacks here.
While doing our thing in Iraq, Somalia has fallen, (remember the warlords that made bubba flinch?), they are no more. Other regions of Africa are going to be subjected to Islam sooner rather than later. S. America is well on it's way. We are not stopping this spread by being in Iraq. I believe we have fallen right into their hands. The GWOT is in Iraq, Al Q and believers are spreading, the very thing the GWOT was to stop.
Further, have you looked at the stats, the sheer numbers, of those we are allowing LEGALLY to enter this Country? Not to mention the "undocumented" millions. Nothing is stopping them from waltzing across our southern border, yesterday, today or tomorrow.
With the GWOT, I was hoping for an effort to slow/stop this spread of Islam. I didn't expect perfection, but I didn't expect it to be a WOsD redux either. I didn't expect to have them allowed to enter this Country in unfriggingbelievable numbers since 9/11. I also didn't expect the WH to leave this Country unsecured post 9/11.
The MSM be damned. The RATs be damned. Your mileage may vary, but thanks for the reasoned approach Dave. Blackbird.
Thanks I appreciate the feedback. It is hard for people to take a clear-eyed look. I understand that. These are good people who are being loyal, I think. And that is admirable. But the time has come to swallow our pride and do what is right - respecting the beliefs and mindset of the Iraqi people as well as our efforts there and the electorate here.
LOL! Blackbird.
Oh come on. It's hard to accept I realize that. But stubborn blindness helps nothing. The democrats now run the House and the Senate. Look at the polls - the American people do not support the war in Iraq. Rumsfeld has resigned. Change will happen.
I would love to see you and others be a part of the change. You have much to contribute.
As much as we want to win in Iraq we can not. Once we lose support of the people we are done. The war was on the clock and our time is up, we need to reset the clock. The only way to reset the clock is with a major attack against us.
If you have a better way to reset the clock I would love to hear it. At the beginning of the war there could have been ways to extend out clock time by regulating news out of the war zones and the like. That didn’t happen and I hope we learn from our mistakes.
OK, so you support the mission in Iraq.
What now?
Do you have a plausible set of actions to achieve success for the mission in Iraq?
Or is your plan to stay on course until our troops are dragged out of Iraq by an irate citizenry acting through their representatives in Congress assembled?
What does it even mean that you "support the mission in Iraq"?
What mission?
I've read each and every post here today, and NO ONE is mocking our troops drama queen. If I missed one, I'm sure you'll be johnny on the spot and guide me to it. Blackbird.
Former infantryman, eh? Well you must've been an officer, and a West Pointer at that, because that's not what they teach at Benning. Or at least not back when I was still in. First of all, the nature of warfare never changes, regardless of how much we wish it would. To the wise soldier/leader, there's no differentiating between "conventional" war, and "counter insurgency", and there sure as hell is no "peacekeeping" or "nation building". You go in with more than you need to put a quick, bloody end to the war, taking as few casualties as possible while inflicting as many as possible, and to teach future enemies a lesson...don't mess with us. I would have been a clown calling for us to fight WW2 with the WW1 Army? Sheesh...I'd ask you to justify such a stupid comment, but instead I'll just let it stand on it's own (de)merits so everyone can see just how idiotic it is. As Limbaugh says, if someone insists on being stupid, stand back and let 'em go to it.
"Different mission, different problems, different solutions. The Conventional Military dogmas you spend all your time screaming do not work for this sort of mission. Learn the differences."
Wrong. There is but one military solution...kick the enemy's a** and show the world how futile it is to mess with us. You can try negotiations, diplomacy, sanctions, etc., but when the time comes to send my buddies into the mix, let slip the dogs of war and let the enemy learn his lesson.
So, since you're the teacher, why don't you demonstrate where the "winning the hearts and minds" approach to war has actually worked? Where...maybe Vietnam? How about Bosnia, Kosovo, Haiti, Somalia? How about the Brits in India? The French in the Congo? How about the UN "peacekeeping" missions in the Sanai and in Lebanon? Sorry, professor...the one and only way to win a war is to cream and demolish your enemy, beat him and his entire society into submission, and force him to toe your line. Or else.
" Quit just mindlessly shouting your slogans and try listening one time to what the people on the ground in Iraq are tell you."
Hehehehehe...you really are clueless, aren't you? I have friends "on the ground" as we speak. My best friend from high school is a Marine E-8, and was "on the ground" in Fallujah, forced to sit on his hands while Sadr's men rearmed and refortified their fighting positions, while we got suckered into "cease fire talks" that were nothing but a way to buy time. Come to think of it, kinda like the frst time we tried to "win the hearts and minds", and the Commies lured us into those BS Paris peace talks, but I digress.
Look Johnny Boy, you're a good loyal GOP party man, and a loyal Bush subject. I understand your loyalty to your president has given you tunnel vision, and whenever someone comes along and rocks your little boat (the SS Bushbot?), you get angry and lash out. It's okay...he'll be gone in two more years, and FReepers like me will quit talking about how much of a clueless moron he is (oaky, that's a bit harsh...the tax cuts were great, if only the Pubbies in Congress had the guts to make them permanent, which they don't). We'll have another RINO in the WH, or maybe a Rat to pick on.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
are you kidding? the reason why things seem so bad in Iraq just now is that more Iraqis are killing each other. How does our leaving now facilitate "a place where Iraqis can, etc..."? Blame us for a lot of things if you must , but don't blame us for the upsurge of sectarian violence
Such are your words and thoughts.
It's far easier, safer, and less risky to friendlies to target and isolate an enemy in his own back yard than on our porch.
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.