Abandoning Iraq (1. Declare victory: 2. Cut; 3. Run)

RealClearPolitics ^ | November 8, 2006 | David Warren

[quidnunc]

Regardless of its final composition, and regardless of other pressing issues or its mandate, the leading item of business for the new U.S. Congress will be Iraq.

It didn't matter who won control of each house — the fix was already in. Look at the composition of the Baker-Hamilton commission, which the outgoing Congress had already appointed to "find a way out of Iraq" — a bipartisan commission, representing the foreign-policy opponents of President Bush in both the Republican and Democratic parties. Soon it will formally report.

James Baker, secretary of state under President Bush's father, was the man who, in 1989, secured an American exit from Lebanon by effectively surrendering the country to Assad's Syria. Lee Hamilton, former Democrat chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, joined him in stacking the Commission's study groups with men and women representing the pre-9/11 foreign policy consensus, which could be summarized in the phrase, "stability through disengagement". On the Baker-Hamilton plan, Congress will take the war in Iraq out of President Bush's hands, as Congress took the Vietnam War out of President Nixon's. Iraq will then be delivered into the hands of Iran's ayatollahs.

-snip-

[Allegra]

No problem. (Mako mishkila.)

It's just incomprehensible to me to think the Dems could come in and ruin all of the progress that has been made here.

The troops, their families and those who made the ultimate sacrifice for this deserve so much better than that.

As do the Iraqis. We can't let them down again!

[redgolum]

I didn't fire anyone. Voted for the R in most races (some local ones are non partisan).

My point is this. If we are in a war, why the heck are we at least trying to see who is coming in?

[Hatteras]

The terrorists attacked on 9/11 and we slammed them but we didn't eliminate them. Sooner or later, if they could hold on just long enough, America would grow weary of the fight. Yesterday, America blinked and lifted their boot off the snake's head. It is in their minds that they (the terrorists) are responsible for the downfall of Rumsfeld and the Bush administration. They will rest, heal, re-build and then, when the time is right, they will go for the gold.

[Loyolas Mattman]

Let's get real. We just got our butts handed to us last night. The sloganeering isn't helping.

What proof is there that a third-rate insurgent in Iraq is going to travel here and become Muhammad Atta? It's like saying that a buck private is the same as the Delta Force. It doesn't make sense on its face.

The facts of this damn war are so muddy that the blankety blank New York Times admitted that Saddam was within a year of a nuke and no one made a blanking peep about it. What is our real strategy, and why have we done what we've done? I've heard about three different rationales - Enough already.

Frankly, part of me wants to see all the bad guys congregate in one place. Easier to take them out should they act up, rather than having to do trash removal around the world. Put them all in one place and smother them out.

[Hatteras]

"What "blinking" caused 9/11?"

The Clinton administration's failure to act on previous terror attacks. Where have you been?

[antceecee]

Amazing isn't it???

[brydic1]

To have a war, there must be two opposing sides. Please inform me who is opposing the Islamists. The West will just give way, give way, until there is nothing left to give. There is no will in the West, either here in the US or in Europe to take on these Islamist terrorists.

[Loyolas Mattman]

This started with the WTC back in 1993.

They don't care how we vote - by that logic, they'd be all over blowing up Salt Lake City and Montgomery,AL. No, they want to blow up DC and NY.

Our biggest mistake is trying to figure out why they do what they do. It matters little in the grand sceme of things.

[NickatNite2003]

When asked in the future about the Dims,
the appropriate Republican response
should be:

" Well, we *tried* to warn you."

[Defiant]

The MSM has to wait until the Dems enact some new policy (tax hikes, a budget) before they start claiming that the economy is better.

If Bush had balls, he would not sign a budget until the Dems extend his tax cuts. Let the train wreck happen. It would have worked if Dole hadn't pulled the plug in 1995; it would work now, and what does Bush care about his popularity rating? Not much. The Dems are the ones who squeal when the government comes to a halt. Let them.

[AngryJawa]

It's just incomprehensible to me to think the Dems could come in and ruin all of the progress that has been made here.

As a boy, I watched on TV as the last Huey took off from the rooftop of the American Embassy in Saigon under a weakened Republican President and ascendant Democrat Congress.

Our departure was a direct result of lefty pressure and resulted in untold death and misery. I see a nauseatingly similar dynamic taking shape here. Nothing the Dems can stoop to surprises me anymore.

[TechnicalEcstacy]

We should all get used to this! Did we really think that Rebublicans would we in charge for the entire course of the War on Islamofacism? Why do you think the Cold War took almost 50 years? Because there was a back and forth of power between the hawks and the doves. This is expected and normal. We should take a breath and realize that this is the early days of a long term war. Attacks by the enemy will ensure that this issue stays mostly in the foreground for a long time to come.

[DesScorp]

"4. Prepare body bags for the terrorist attacks on your home soil..."

And prepare for even more. For those of us that remember the 70's, we know what's going to happen. We're going to abandon those people over there, and a lot of them are now going to die. The ones that remain will be enslaved. That's what happens when you surrender to tyrants. Remember the Vietnamese boat people? Desperately fleeing communist Vietnam for freedom? Get ready for a new wave of Iraqi refugees fleeing Al Qaida. You can also count on embassy takeovers, hostages, and attacks on American interests and military forces all across the world. And the Democrats will actively cause this to happen. But the American people handed them the mandate for it last night. The blame is squarely on the shoulders of the American Voter. Freedom includes consequences of action, and it seems the majority of voters just don't give a sh!t.

[nathanbedford]

The terrorists have no need to hit us in the homeland just yet - we are doing the job for them in Iraq, bleeding our troops emptying our treasury, offending our allies, and demonstrating to all Islam that we cannot effectively cope with asymetrical opposition to occupation. The net result: we become daily less able to deter Iran from getting the bomb and also less able to invade for military and diplomatic reasons.

The Iranians and the Al Quaida had only to wait until the war broke us on the rocks of domestic politics. That happened yesterday. The author is right, the decision to get out of Iraq has already been made. Rumsfeld is only the down payment. The rest will be cosmetics.

After the withdrawal, expect an attack on the homeland because the terrorists must do that to advance jihad once we have stopped hitting ourselves with a hammer in Iraq. The question is, will it be a nuke? If not, the terrorists will have made a fatal error and changed the equation by waking up America.

[AngryJawa]

We should all get used to this! Did we really think that Rebublicans would we in charge for the entire course of the War on Islamofacism? Why do you think the Cold War took almost 50 years? Because there was a back and forth of power between the hawks and the doves. This is expected and normal. We should take a breath and realize that this is the early days of a long term war. Attacks by the enemy will ensure that this issue stays mostly in the foreground for a long time to come.

Expected and normal and UNACCEPTABLE!

We as Americans have developed a really bad habit of kicking the can down the road until the known problem becomes a crisis. Social Security, Immigration, the GWOT - same bloody gameplan. It's a failure of leadership, but it's also a failure in OUR character that we don't have the stomach, the attention span, the balls, or the wisdom to solve the problem RFN rather than wait until there are no good solutions. How much more blood will it cost us because we as Americans can't stay focused?

I NEVER want to get used to this.

[rllngrk33]

Give me one reason why terrorists would be more likely to strike now

1. They were rooting for the Democrats to win and that will make it more likely we'll cut and run. Now they'll step up the attacks to speed up the process.

2. At the request of speaker-to-be Pelosi, Bush just threw Rumsfeld under the bus.

[rllngrk33]

Hamas just renegged its truce with Israel. You think it will take that long?

If we're lucky it will. I'm trying to be optimistic :)

[Loyolas Mattman]

That's my point, terrorists root for no one. We're all infidels. They have no plan, no strategy other than kill people and break things (literally, not as Rush used the phrase). They are simply incompatable with the western world, and the sooner we get used to the idea the better.

[rllngrk33]

"The only question is, what are you prepared to do about it?"

Load up on lead projectiles and lead dispensers.

[rllngrk33]

They are simply incompatable with the western world, and the sooner we get used to the idea the better.

I'm with you. But I fear it's going to take more terrorist attacks on US soil for people to understand.