Political Crossfire Forums

[Dennis]

philm wrote: ...A simple flight with our collective tails between our legs, will neither help our international reputation - nor will it help the geo-political situation....

The problem here is that the GOP has successfully and wrongfully framed the concept as "cut and run". No such thing would occur, at least by Democrat standards (by Green Party standards, yes).

"Cut and run" would be to pull all of our troops out on the spot and leave the next day, something the Green Party proposes. That is not what the Democrats (at least not John Kerry) is proposing.

What they propose is setting a timeline of a year's length and slowly begin withdrawing troops out over that period of time. What this will accomplish is two things:

1. Forcing the Iraq government to stop squabbling and get their act together to take over their own country. There is no reason why U.S. and U.K. (and others) troops have to die because the new Iraq government can't come to agreement and begin running their new democracy. That's insane. And, that's not cutting and running.

2. The removal of our troops will be done responsibly. Taking them all out at once is irresponsible, such as The Green Party plan, because of the current situation (that we created) over there. The whole place would fall apart if we just "up and left". A slow removal of our troops over time would ease things at a reasonable pace and still allow our troops to get out. It's the responsible way to withdraw.

As you can see, "cut and run" is a term that is nothing more than a political tool used by the Republicans for political gain. It does not accurately describe placing a timetable on the Iraq government.

Why place a timetable? It is akin to your boss telling you that you must get a certain project done, but you can get it done whenever you are ready. Are you going to do it then? Hell no. Why should you? You have all the time in the world. That is what is happening in Iraq. Meanwhile, our troops die.

If your boss says get this project done by a certain time, you will do it. That is what the withdrawal plan is about. It's about ACCOUNTABILITY and RESPONSIBILITY for Iraq BY the Iraq government. It has nothing to do with cutting and running with our tails between our legs. It has everything to do with the Iraq government taking responsibility for their government and not wasting our time while our troops are put in harm's way.

Personally, I think it is disgusting that the Republicans resorted to such a false and immature schoolyard tactic for political gain by framing a common sense plan in the incorrect way, on purpose. It proves, once more, that they don't need to be in control of us. It also shows that Bush has no sense of real responsibility or leadership to allow Iraq an indefenite amount of time to take their government over while our troops handle all the fighting.

Interestingly enough, it looks as though he is finally coming to his senses recently (see recent news) and suggesting a timeline, something John Kerry has been suggesting (not Hillary) all along! And, just in time for elections!

Too bad it won't be enough.

[asainspace]

mendosan wrote: I think that its time for the British troops to come home, because we are intesifying the situation in Basra and where we are in southern Iraq, however I am very fearful that if the US leaves there will be no stopping the massive civil war and mass genocides, which will follow, which will make the current situation seem trivial.

And the genocide started three years ago if we remember rightly.

As you said, our presence is making things worse, so how can it get any worse if we leave?

mendosan wrote: Which would man you Asainspace, no better that he is, and just as lamentable.

Depending on whether it was made as a point to highlight the stupidity of the poster or as my personal view, which you didn't even clarify. So if you think I would literally act that way, then obviously you don't know me, which you don't. :roll: