Political Crossfire Forums

[Richard Owl Mirror]

I've been watching the repeats of the talking heads from this mornings news programs.
Each person, regardless of political side stated the only solution is that the Iraqi's stand up a military that can defend their government and that we will not leave until such time. Then in the next breath they would state that UNLESS the Iraqi's stand up, America is not willing to stay and assist them.

So, let me get this straight...............

We won't leave until a sustainable, viable Iraqi military can defend a Democratic Government.
Because if we leave before that happens, Iraq will descend into chaos.
Yet, if the Iraqi Government can not provide a viable, sustainable Military and they do not possess the Political will to solve their problems we will leave because we had done as much as we could.



The logic above is disjointed and incongruent !

If the Iraqi Political Leadership is not up to the task and the Iraqi Military is not up to the task of defending and preserving order within Iraq, wouldn't leaving only invite chaos ?
Something which we have sworn not to leave behind ?

More rhetoric from the American politicians and Military talking heads ! :bang:

The next thing is that WE must supply the Iraqi Military with the equipment any standing military requires to defend itself from aggressive neighbors such as Iran & Syria.
This would include an Airforce, Navy, Mechanized infantry, and not simply grunts with rifles.
That proposal was estimated to cost the American taxpayers another 70 Billion dollars.

Now what happens if the US Taxpayer spends 70 Billion on hardware and those same weapons fall into unfriendly hands?

When will a modicum of Wisdom appear in this Administrations logic ?

[sLiPpY]

From what I understand, the majority of the insurgency also serves in Iraq's security forces.

In other terms, we're already busy arming and training the enemy.

[Richard Owl Mirror]

sLiPpY wrote: From what I understand, the majority of the insurgency also serves in Iraq's security forces.

In other terms, we're already busy arming and training the enemy.

EXACTLY :gdgf:

What's next on the list, Iran has a Nuclear Weapon so we must provide the insurgency with a Nuke of their own ?

[letfreedomring]

------------------------------------------------
When will a modicum of Wisdom appear in this Administrations logic ?
-------------------------------------------------

It's not just this administration. Last time I've checked, the DNC is in charge of both houses of Congress. I thought they ran on the platform that they would bring our troops home and soon. So what happened?? was that just political BS to get votes?? How surprising.

[Richard Owl Mirror]

letfreedomring wrote: ------------------------------------------------
When will a modicum of Wisdom appear in this Administrations logic ?
-------------------------------------------------

It's not just this administration. Last time I've checked, the DNC is in charge of both houses of Congress. I thought they ran on the platform that they would bring our troops home and soon. So what happened?? was that just political BS to get votes?? How surprising.
Perhaps you do not realize that Democratic control of Congress does not take place until after January 3, 2007 ?

110th United States Congress
Quote: The 110th United States Congress is the next meeting of the Legislature of the United States federal government. It will convene on January 3, 2007 and expire on January 3, 2009.
All 435 Members of the House of Representatives were elected on November 7, 2006.

[letfreedomring]

I understand....but this is from your own post:

-------------------
Each person, regardless of political side
-------------------

This tells me that neither Party is going to yank the plug any time soon......

[Richard Owl Mirror]

letfreedomring wrote: I understand....but this is from your own post:

-------------------
Each person, regardless of political side
-------------------

This tells me that neither Party is going to yank the plug any time soon......
I was commenting on the people talking on the program.
There were a Republican as well as a Democrat on the panel.
And yes, they both were making similar comments.
How does that Translate to a failure of the Democratic Party taking the reins of power in the next Congress?

[Revenant]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: letfreedomring wrote: I understand....but this is from your own post:

-------------------
Each person, regardless of political side
-------------------

This tells me that neither Party is going to yank the plug any time soon......
I was commenting on the people talking on the program.
There were a Republican as well as a Democrat on the panel.
And yes, they both were making similar comments.
How does that Translate to a failure of the Democratic Party taking the reins of power in the next Congress?

I'm betting we will still be in Iraq in 2 years. That would be a failure.

[letfreedomring]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: letfreedomring wrote: I understand....but this is from your own post:

-------------------
Each person, regardless of political side
-------------------

This tells me that neither Party is going to yank the plug any time soon......
I was commenting on the people talking on the program.
There were a Republican as well as a Democrat on the panel.
And yes, they both were making similar comments.
How does that Translate to a failure of the Democratic Party taking the reins of power in the next Congress?

It does not. However, I worry that we are caught in a bad way in Iraq, and despite what the DNC promises, our troops will not be coming home soon. That is the only comments I'm making....as for the other pressing issues, I'm of a hopeful wait and see....

[Trajan]

Revenant wrote: Richard Owl Mirror wrote: letfreedomring wrote: I understand....but this is from your own post:

-------------------
Each person, regardless of political side
-------------------

This tells me that neither Party is going to yank the plug any time soon......
I was commenting on the people talking on the program.
There were a Republican as well as a Democrat on the panel.
And yes, they both were making similar comments.
How does that Translate to a failure of the Democratic Party taking the reins of power in the next Congress?

I'm betting we will still be in Iraq in 2 years. That would be a failure.

aka stay the course....

But: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_iraq

WASHINGTON - Congressional leaders displayed eroding patience in the Iraqi government on Sunday, adding pressure on President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to find a faster path to peace when they meet this week.

"It is not too late. The United States can still extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq," Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a potential presidential contender in 2008, said in urging for a planned withdrawal of U.S. troops.

"If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder — one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead," Hagel wrote in Sunday's Washington Post.

"We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam," said Hagel, a combat veteran of that war. "Honorable intentions are not policies and plans."

[Sands]

letfreedomring wrote: ------------------------------------------------
When will a modicum of Wisdom appear in this Administrations logic ?
-------------------------------------------------

It's not just this administration. Last time I've checked, the DNC is in charge of both houses of Congress. I thought they ran on the platform that they would bring our troops home and soon. So what happened?? was that just political BS to get votes?? How surprising.

The DNC is not a political party... The Democratic National Committee is an organization that plans the Party's quadrennial presidential nominating convention; promotes the election of Party candidates with both technical and financial support; and works with national, state, and local party organizations, elected officials, candidates, and constituencies to respond to the needs and views of the Democratic electorate and the nation.

[Mr. Sunshine]

Yeah, the problem is the talking heads in the media were never there to begin with. The Commanders and Soldiers say "go Big" or "go Long". We will probably go big and then long. Feel free to fly over there and tell them how wrong they are based on your expert analysis of news show guests. :lol:

[Timmytour]

Quote: The next thing is that WE must supply the Iraqi Military with the equipment any standing military requires to defend itself from aggressive neighbors such as Iran & Syria.

If Iraq needs the equipment to defend itself, why would it be from neighbours that to my mind have never attacked it except in self defence?

The protection would surely be required would be such that would defend it against those countries that have historically attacked it.

That would have to be some provision :shock:

:lol:

[Kane]

We never did what actually needed to be done because of the military fantasy brought about by this administration and the numbers allocated to occupation.

If we don't/can't/won't provide the necessary numbers needed for stabilization then we might as well leave.

The incongruities largely rest with those that perpetrated the invasion in the first place. The resulting dysfunctional Iraqi government and military are only byproducts.

Perhaps it is too late to revert what has already been done...I don't know. I'm still out on that one... :think:

I'm beginning to fear that both paths...withdrawal or staying...will have the same negative repercussions for the US, Iraq, and the world.

[Timmytour]

Kane wrote: We never did what actually needed to be done because of the military fantasy brought about by this administration and the numbers allocated to occupation.

If we don't/can't/won't provide the necessary numbers needed for stabilization then we might as well leave.

The incongruities largely rest with those that perpetrated the invasion in the first place. The resulting dysfunctional Iraqi government and military are only byproducts.

Perhaps it is too late to revert what has already been done...I don't know. I'm still out on that one... :think:

I'm beginning to fear that both paths...withdrawal or staying...will have the same negative repercussions for the US, Iraq, and the world.

There appears to be a lot of sense in what you have posted - though some argue it wasn't a case of not doing what was needed to be done, but doing what was not needed to be done. I certainly think that the policy of invading and occupying Iraq had more to do with personal objectives than those given to the American people and indeed the rest of the world. There were other alternatives for potentially achieving the latter which were never explored let alone considered. The trouble was that one "idea" for resolving the problem was presented in such a way that if you didn't believe in the "idea" you didn't want a solution.

I've been of the opinion expressed in your last sentence for some considerable time now. Only for me, once you are of a mind that there stay or go there will be no difference, it's becomes a no brainer. The decision surely has to be to go.

Apart from the obvious advantage of taking US troops out of harm's way, withdrawing under your own steam now will prevent one of three potential circumstances which I would view as being infinitely worse namely..

1/ Being ordered by the Iraq government to leave. This includes still being around for an election which results in overwhelming victory for a group extolling this policy.

2/ Being told to leave by an Iraqi government which in turn has been advised by either the Iranians, Syrians or a combination of both to do this.

3/ Being told to stay by an Iraqi government which in turn has been advised by either the Iranians, Syrians or a combination of both to do this :shock: