Political Crossfire Forums

[Donkeykick]

I guess that most people have heard that Dick Cheney is in Riyadh discussing the prospects of handing the football over to the Saudis for the next two years in order to try to bring more stability to Iraq. What do you think? Good plan? Bad plan? (Also, I always thought Condi Rice always handled these sort of matters. We know why Rumsfeld is not there--no brainer. Hm..might be because Bush has figured out that Arabs frown on women taking a role in leadership? This is a serious crossroad to turn so... :think: )

In my opinion on how this is handled... would be how the real wheeling's and dealings go on behind the scenes as this goes down--King Fahd could be in jeopardy from extremists that already hate him, so it could be quite beneficial to him to embrace the plan wholeheartedly; however, if he chose to do a complete 360 and start to give in to the extremists, than this could acerbate the situation more.

One way or another, I guess this is worth a try for Bush & Co. I see no other options for this quagmire. Here lately, one must take under consideration of the newest, lit matches getting closer to the fuses in the Middle East:

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/25/cheney.saudi/index.html]What CNN wrote: ...Cheney's visit comes two days after what's considered the single worst attack in Iraq since the war began in 2003: an assault widely believed to have been carried out by Sunnis on the Shiite enclave of Sadr City in Baghdad. That attack killed more than 200 people and wounded 250 others.

In retaliation, enraged Shiites burned people to death and torched Sunni mosques, according to residents.

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani postponed his trip on Saturday to Iran for talks with his Iranian counterpart, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on how to stabilize Iraq, after Baghdad's airport was shut down.

Tension escalated in Lebanon after the assassination of Cabinet minister Pierre Gemayel, an act seen as undermining Siniora's government.

Next week President Bush is scheduled to travel to Amman, Jordan, for talks on security and the war in Iraq with its prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki.

The White House has said the talks will go forward, despite a threat made Friday by anti-U.S. Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's bloc to pull out of the government if the meeting takes place. The bloc holds 30 seats in the 275-member Parliament and six Cabinet ministries. [/url]

Can you see any other solutions for Bush and his administration? I sure can't. :?

[DanteAlighieri]

An exit strategy? Up the very last minute before the Iraq war, the current administration had an exit strategy. Unfortunately that strategy depended on the idealist assumption that our troops would be welcomed with open arms and as "liberators" and the whole operation would resemble Operation Iraqi Comfort, being short and sweet ("two to four months" as Mr. Feith said).

Also, don't forget that al-Chalabi (Rummy's pet) was a prominent part in the idealistic Iraqi government to be, and unfortunately for all, neither the Iraqi's nor the US military would get behind him.

How 'bout this for an exit strategy (just an idea, seems a little late now):
-Mass withdrawal of approx. 60,000 troops. Be sure that there is no appearance that these troops are ever going back. This (hopefully) should put enough pressure on the Iraqi government to really get some things done.
-After that, further withdrawal in sets of about the same, relatively quick
-I hate to say it, but I don't think that the US has much more to do in that country (we've already "helped" enough).

[usa-1]

DanteAlighieri wrote: An exit strategy? Up the very last minute before the Iraq war, the current administration had an exit strategy. Unfortunately that strategy depended on the idealist assumption that our troops would be welcomed with open arms and as "liberators" and the whole operation would resemble Operation Iraqi Comfort, being short and sweet ("two to four months" as Mr. Feith said).

Also, don't forget that al-Chalabi (Rummy's pet) was a prominent part in the idealistic Iraqi government to be, and unfortunately for all, neither the Iraqi's nor the US military would get behind him.

How 'bout this for an exit strategy (just an idea, seems a little late now):
-Mass withdrawal of approx. 60,000 troops. Be sure that there is no appearance that these troops are ever going back. This (hopefully) should put enough pressure on the Iraqi government to really get some things done.
-After that, further withdrawal in sets of about the same, relatively quick
-I hate to say it, but I don't think that the US has much more to do in that country (we've already "helped" enough).

I am surprised Bush would consider an exit strategy when according to him & his Adminstration - the reason US troops are dying there daily is so terrorists won't attack Americans here. Has this changed overnight in the war on terror? What will he tell the troops and the families about this new found revelation?

Personally, I favor a withdraw that brings home all our war toys and US troops from foreign soils. America needs a 100 year rest and renovation to re-focus on our principles, morals, art & culture, and infrastructure. That is what American taxpayers should be paying for.

[hammerhead]

Donkeykick wrote: I guess that most people have heard that Dick Cheney is in Riyadh discussing the prospects of handing the football over to the Saudis for the next two years in order to try to bring more stability to Iraq. What do you think? Good plan? Bad plan? (Also, I always thought Condi Rice always handled these sort of matters. We know why Rumsfeld is not there--no brainer. Hm..might be because Bush has figured out that Arabs frown on women taking a role in leadership? This is a serious crossroad to turn so... :think: )

In my opinion on how this is handled... would be how the real wheeling's and dealings go on behind the scenes as this goes down--King Fahd could be in jeopardy from extremists that already hate him, so it could be quite beneficial to him to embrace the plan wholeheartedly; however, if he chose to do a complete 360 and start to give in to the extremists, than this could acerbate the situation more.

One way or another, I guess this is worth a try for Bush & Co. I see no other options for this quagmire. Here lately, one must take under consideration of the newest, lit matches getting closer to the fuses in the Middle East:

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/25/cheney.saudi/index.html]What CNN wrote: ...Cheney's visit comes two days after what's considered the single worst attack in Iraq since the war began in 2003: an assault widely believed to have been carried out by Sunnis on the Shiite enclave of Sadr City in Baghdad. That attack killed more than 200 people and wounded 250 others.

In retaliation, enraged Shiites burned people to death and torched Sunni mosques, according to residents.

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani postponed his trip on Saturday to Iran for talks with his Iranian counterpart, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on how to stabilize Iraq, after Baghdad's airport was shut down.

Tension escalated in Lebanon after the assassination of Cabinet minister Pierre Gemayel, an act seen as undermining Siniora's government.

Next week President Bush is scheduled to travel to Amman, Jordan, for talks on security and the war in Iraq with its prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki.

The White House has said the talks will go forward, despite a threat made Friday by anti-U.S. Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's bloc to pull out of the government if the meeting takes place. The bloc holds 30 seats in the 275-member Parliament and six Cabinet ministries. [/url]

Can you see any other solutions for Bush and his administration? I sure can't. :?
Don't look at Iraq as a quagmire. Look at Iraq as an opportunity to kill 12,000 al quida fighters who are in the country.

[Donkeykick]

hammerhead wrote: Don't look at Iraq as a quagmire. Look at Iraq as an opportunity to kill 12,000 al quida fighters who are in the country.

hammerhead: Killing 12,000 al-Qaeda is not the problem; the problem is the 24,000 or more that step in and take their place.

When this whole thing started, it was about Saddam Hussein and WMDS. Guess what? There was a Saddam Hussein but no WMDS. Later it evolved into, "it's a haven for terrorists." Guess what? The whole Middle East has been a haven for terrorists way before 911.

Afghanistan started out OK. However the whole thing messed up when George Bush decided to send people that we were fighting earlier into Tora Bora to get bin Laden; we know how that turned out. :roll: A little later on he decided he would take on Iraq on a whim.

So we defeated Hussein's regime and started to instill Democracy there. Guess what? Those people are taking to Democracy like a penguin would take to the Sahara Desert. Do I like that? No. But you can only take a horse to water; the horse has to drink it though.

Bush is just now starting to realize this...just the reason that we now see Dick Cheney over in Saudi Arabia asking King Fahd to take over slowly, so that George Bush can leave without people seeing tomato all over his face.