getting usa out of iraq....strategy

posted by germanicus on July 18, 2024 - 11:52am

(i won't believe government until bush & cheney are outta office....)

getting usa out of iraq....strategy
( if you wanna end the war now ~ stop the funding......)

(a huge number of iraqis' are paying the price for this conflict; to support our (usa) terrorism conflict. )

i'm thinking, bush (a boy lost in an adult's world), along with his gang, congress' & the media's acquiescence broke iraq;
now i guess we (citizens) gotta try to fix it (our paranoia).....ugh.

we've been there 5 years not much has changed (shades of vietnam)

we tell the "international community" which would include the surrounding muslim countries that:
1) in 6 months, we (usa) will arm each & every iraqi..
2) in 6 months, we (usa) will leave iraq....(damn the oil prices)...and get outta their iraqis' way.
~ al-quaeda (they would be the only foreigners in country, now) wouldn't have a chance against the sunis, shia & kurds.....i'm thinking
~ al-quaeda will bail out of Iraq and follow us to Afganistan...

3) the international community will have 6 months to prepare: to help solve things or " hunker down ".

result ~ either
the iraq conflict created by bush will become an international issue with international support
or
the iraq conflict will become a muslim issue / problem; they (the muslim community) have too long be passive about, that of radical islam.
once the death & dying settles; then, hopefully, we (usa) can help...........rebuild
or
move our iraq forces to Kurdistan, saudi arabia, kuwait & afganistan; let the civil war play out.
once the death & dying settles; then, hopefully, we (usa) can help...........rebuild.

note1:
a huge number of iraqis' are paying the price for this conflict; to support our (usa) terrorism conflict.
a small minority of Americans are making the personal sacrifice for this Iraq war.
until every American (fm wall-street to main-street) is making personal sacrifice's for this Iraq war ~ we shouldn't be there.

note2:
~ if you want me to support staying in iraq (ugh) then ask your senators & representative to:
1) 1st & foremost: impeach bush & cheney....the madmen who started this insane iraq conflict...
2) fund the conflict out in the open ~ identify / institute / deduct for the "iraq conflict tax" on every paycheck (excl military personnel) in the USA.
~ or perhaps an "iraq conflict sales tax" (excl. military personnel)....a reminder of the sacrifice the "few & their families" are making.
3) reinstate the draft with "no" deferments (except for "real" medical needs)
4) ask your (federal & state) senators & representative @ congress.org: lnk ~ email your request to congress’

Average: 3.3 (7 votes)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

if death & dying is welcomed by radical muslims then..
it is probably better the muslim(s)community stand up and redress radical muslim teaching / idealogy.

a small minority of Americans are making the personal sacrifice for this Iraq war.
until every American is making personal sacrifice's for this Iraq war ~ we shouldn't be there.
a huge number of iraqis' are paying the price for this conflict; to support our terrorism war.
if the draft were back in vogue....how long do you think people would support this war ?

Chertoff has a gut feeling one is imminent. Bushe feels a DRAFT!

Bush has done just what Hitler did. He has done everything he can to keep us from sacrificing at home. Hilter did not commit his economy exclusively to the war because he wanted the home front to be spared any inconveniences so they would support the war (or, at least, not think about it). Bush doesn't want us to think about it too much so he does not attend funerals, he tells us to keep buying things as a sacrifice to war, and, as he spends our military strength, he would never have a draft. The draft would bring a quick close to the war by either supplying us with the real troop strength that it takes to clean up little Dickie's and Bushie's mess, or shock people into realizing how terible the war is and how poorly it has been run. Why did this country ever allow an over-privileged, three-time loser (check out his business career) to be president? And, why did we allow Cheney, who got his start in the NIXON white house, the criminal he is, to gain access to the white house again (even though he isn't REALLY a part of the executive branch). UNBELIEVABLE!

--Think also of the comfort and rights of others

We have been very sheltered from the pain of that war outside of what we see on TV. Your point is a great one: as long as we here are sheltered from the reality of this war, either by lack of draft or no real economic impact (what if we as taxpayers had to write out a check right now for the expenses thus far?), we'll never truly feel it. Those families with soldiers are certainly feeling it, but the rest of us love our iPods and evening TV. We knows it's going on, but do we really know what "it" is?

-GP

Join the Unity08 Delegate wiki today! http://www.unity-usa.org

Because Americans have by and large become a bunch of groveling, profoundly anti-intellectual, over-eating, self-centered, drugged, myopic morons, most of whom are, apparently, unable even to find their own country on a world map. They can name the contestants on popular game shows, but they can't tell you when their own civil war was fought. They elected as President an idiot who didn't even know who the world's nuclear powers are. (Hell, he couldn't even f***ing PRONOUNCE the word!!!) I'm a damn guitar player, and I knew THAT! Your average American's knowledge of the real world should rightly shame a third-grader. We get what we deserve. If you want to make real change you must (as always) start at the bottom. Educate those around you.

You said that our President is an idiot. And what would be your examples of wise state leaders in the world today? Now dead murderer Saddam? Oily-reach King Abdallah? Soon to be prosecuted for bribes Jacques Chirac? Corrupted Kofi Annan? Bearchested KGB officer Vladimir Pitin?

Just curious.

I agree totally with you Germ on the lack of shared sacrifice thing, and do think we all need to share as a society (with a draft, higher taxes, much higher gas tax, etc) if we feel as a society the fight against the jihadi/salafi/hirabist and their franchise groups is important to be fought. And I think its is. But then you overstate - we lose focus if we think this is about just oil, just about bush, or just about religion and base our strategy on that. It is about so much more which is Power Politics pure and simple. remember the complexities of the Cold War!

I'm not saying that there is NO religious factor or that oil is not a consideration, or that Bush's bothched occupation does not matter - it does to a certain degree. But the prime driver in this whole mess is Power politics - Some people have it and other people want it. As all politics is local, so it is with all Power Politics. What I am saying is that all local power politics has many facets one of which may (or may not) be a religious one. We need to recognize the subtleties.

That local politics may be driven by religion for sure but it may also be driven by culture, economics, politics, social organizations, ethnic/tribal, family, TV, Internet, yada, yada... There are MANY sources of their discontent and it's NOT all religious. We really miss the forest from the trees and all the subtleties by lumping Religion as the one and only cause. Robert Pape's expose on Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism”
(http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901fabook84526a/robert-pape/dying-to-win-the-strategic-logic-of-suicide-terrorism.html ) portrays really well that religion, although a factor of some no doubt are by far the exception rather than the rule. A great majority of these Suicide bombers are secular and non-Islamic and fairly well off actual with good prospects (Jihadi Jet-Setters). I do not agree with some of Pape’s policy suggestions but I think his factual assessment of the forces driving these suicide bombers should be addressed.

Also Valli Nasr's excellent book/article (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060701faessay85405/vali-nasr/when-the-shiites-rise.htmll (The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future) on the big rifts between the Shiites and Sunni's show that a lot of what is going on over there is a power struggle between those 2 parts of Islam and not so much between the West and Islam. As Nasr states it essentially a power struggle between and amongst the Islamic as well as the secular reformist/fascists elements (Assad, Saddam/Quaddafi formerly).

There are LOTS of sources of the various pathologies over there driving this whole sucker and NOT exclusively Koranic/Islamic by a long shot. I am NOT saying there is NO religious factor, but not as much as some would like to believe. To ignore the subtleties over there we risk taking a naive simplistic assessment of what is going on over there and it risks resulting in a naive/simplistic policy. That is what I fear some are doing by overemphasizing the religious factor. It is a factor but one of many!! Same with oil! Same with Bush!

It kind of reminds me of the old Cold War days with the Communists where we simplistically thought there was a dire messianic overarching Communist monolith and you either had to be with us or against us. If we had followed that course of thinking and not recognized the subtleties and planned policies based on the Communists intentions rather than their capabilities and the key non-monolithic developments in Yugoslavia, China, Viet Nam etc , then we would be still picking our collective navels and over watching the Soviet Kremlin tea leaves and trying in vain to decipher Lenin-Marx-Mao ad nauseum to come up with a decent policy.

Fortunately we had guys like Kennan, Marshall, Acheson, Kissinger, Schultz, Jim Baker, Truman, and Presidents all the way up thru Reagan and Bush who did have the smarts to see the subtleties and adjust policies accordingly in the context of a cogent, consistent overarching Grand Strategy. We are a long ways from that now and I fear that labeling all the sources of conduct over there under a simple Islamo-Koranic banner really misses the reality of what is going on over there and devising suc a similar cogent Grand Strategy against Global Terrorism. The Iraq Study Group made a start that both sidesare sidling upto but we have quite a ways to go.

DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com

http://milligansstew.blogspot.com

"Fortunately we had guys like Kennan, Marshall, Acheson, Kissinger, Schultz, Jim Baker, Truman, and Presidents all the way up thru Reagan and Bush who did have the smarts to see the subtleties"

I'm assuming you mean the first Bush here, not this guy

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Ambassador_claims_shortly_before_invasion_Bush_0804.html

Do you mean the Kennan who founded the policy of containment, or the apostate critic of the US foreign policy he helped create?

Also, what about McNamara and ZBig? ZBig particularly is as good as any for grand strategy...

By subtleties, do you mean "opportunities to expand the empire?"

Just a few questions, there. To the body of the post:

I guess I'm just wondering here how you think drafting American citizens (women too? We're equal in the military's eyes now, right?) will solve the problems in the Middle East, which have existed since long before we became a nation. I also wonder why on Earth you think we should want to continue to adopt their problems as our own. We can't even end strife in the one country we have invaded. Our presence there has produced MORE terrorism. You brush off oil and Bush but these are the determining factors WITHIN power politics that have led to a war of choice in Iraq. The current administration had a great deal to do with "our" decision to attack Iraq. Oil had a great deal to do with it as well. Witness our gov'ts hangup on the Iraqi Oil Law. It's essentially a precondition for our withdrawal. Also, if not for the valuable resource of oil, the US would have zero interest in the Middle East with regards to power politics. You can find just about every President you list or include above saying this, at one point or another.

In bald faced terms of power politics, or the politics of power, terrorism is inconsequential. It is simply useful as a guise to carry out the politics of power, much as communism was useful for the same reason during the Cold War. It gives the US a pretext to preemptively invade countries that are ideologically hostile or even simply unhelpful to US interests. Or have valuable resources that we want to control (read as: stabilize).

While I agree with you that the Shia/Sunni conflict will ultimately drive the future of the Middle East, I'm struggling to find a reason to care. China is the threat that will logically be the greatest to US hegemony. If we're talking about the Hegemony of "the West" in general, the major threat does not change. In fact, with regard to the politics of power, the EU is more of a threat than anything the Middle East could possibly provide for hundreds of years, because they could surpass the US economically, thereby weakening the perception of US world hegemony and opening it to further challenges. Incidentally, the longer we stay in Iraq, the weaker our perceived power will be. It has already happened. This is why you have seen numerous countries begin to up the ante with rhetoric. Next comes militarization.

The "War on Terror" had made the world (by which I mean you and me and all the other people living in it) less safe, as did the Cold War. Even accepting that your above listed statesmen saw "subtleties", the current lot (many of the same folks who actually believe they "won" the Cold War, no?) are actually trying to force their Cold War ideology back onto the world, because that is easier to them than actually rewriting those policies for a changed/changing world. You may argue subtleties, but its the generalization that matters. The Cold War made us all less safe because it produced enough nuclear tonnage to destroy the entire planet many times over. Those weapons haven't gone away. The aggressive unilateralism practiced under the name "The War on Terror" makes it MORE likely that ideological clashes will trigger an actual use of these weapons, and that makes us all less safe.

jtrem you know your history. Good job. A lot of people on these threads just don't know U.S. or world histoy very well. I love these Christians who believe their denomination is a peaceful one. I don't think many Americans realize how violent the histories of Christianity and the United States are.

Think also of the comfort and rights of others

Jtrem, I mean the Kennan that presciently and clearly saw and was knowledgeable of the true sources of Soviet conduct and realistically devised a multi-faceted containment strategy that would keep us and the rest of the world decinderized as we allowed the adverse forces percolating inside the Soviet Union to allow time for the Soviets to collapse on itself. We lack such wisdom today. Kennan later in the late 60s on decried how militarized Containment became (thanks to Acheson, Dulles and others), but the basic tenets and undergirdings of his containment policy did remain in tact throughout the Cold War.

After WWII it became clear to Kennan that the Soviets would project its power beyond its own borders, and that if unchecked it could drive violently toward European and world empire that could threaten American survival. Kennan devised the strategy of containment whereby the U.S needed to demonsrate that the soviets were not your run-of-the mill adversary, and that the U.S needed above all to exercise vigilance and had to concern itself with seemingly minor Soviet advances, because the balance of power in key areas like Europe was so fragile. Purely slap-dash economic and political means tooppose this Soviet adversary were simply not sufficient.

To Kennan, the Soviet government regarded the outside world in a manner so cynical, fearful and antagonistic as to be almost incomprehensible to the American mind. Kennan new close up through his experiences with the Nazis that making the Nazi conquest of Europe appear inevitable to unstable and war-weary populations, the Nazis had easily defeated several European Countries whose aggregate material power outmatched Germany.

What the U.S. had to prevent with the Soviets after WWII was the same totalitarian mindset and any widespread resignation by Europeans to the inevitability of Soviet conquest – that crucial tipping-point moment whereby the industrial nations of Europe and Asia would see the Soviet advance, would see the writing on the wall, and would reconcile themselves to Soviet domination. That tipping-point was as much psychological as much as it was geographical – which the U.S. could not allow the Soviets to cross.

To Kennan one of the vital facts of the international communist movement was the pronounced “bandwagon” character that movement bore. By this Kennan meant that a given proportion of the movement’s adherents are drawn by no ideological enthusiasm, nor not even any instances by about its real nature. Many followers are drawn to it simply by the belief that it is the coming thing, the movement of the future – and that it is on the make and there is NO stopping it (sound familiar today???). And those who hope to survive/thrive in the coming days when it will be the movement of the present will be the people who had the foresight to climb on the badwagon when it was the movement of the future. To Kennan, the US after WWII was dominant and powerful (like we are today), but had to recognize how suddenly the “bandwagon effect” could destabilize international order.

To Kennan containment was about keeping Soviet tyranny at bay both in its physical and psychological forms. Kennan opposed plans to remilitarize centralEuropeand east asia. He urged the U.S. to emphasize non-military forms of containment, such as economic aid, alliances, and diplomatic pressure. He supported initiatives like the Marshall Plan and believed that the struggle with the Soviets could be won without a war and militarization provided U.S. diplomats were skillful enough in reviving independent forms of power in Europe and Asia (i.e. Using the Locals!!)

Kennan did prevail over the militarists in the early years as Truman strategy (Doctrine) that took hold emphasized the political – economic over the military aid. Roll back of the Soviets was effectively eliminated as a Strategy and Kennan’s Containment Strategy prevailed despite many people pushing for a more militaristic approach. With the U.S. ultimate deterrent in place (the atomic bomb) Kennan’s selective nonmilitaristic integrated, internally consistent strategy of containment did result eventually in the eventual mellowing and collapse of the soviets just as he forsaw – from the Soviets own internal contradictions.

Bottom line: what we need now above all is a cogent, internally consistent and multidimensional economic political diplomatic and military Strategy against a very virulent ideological salafi/jihadi/hirabist insurgent movement looking for that key “tipping-pint” to advance their “bandwagon effect” in their area of the globe and beyond. So do not have any illusions about what a defeat in a key and vital are of the globe WOULD do! Bush and the Democrats are still playing sandbox politics for the most part. The only rays of realist bipartisan consensus and hope to me are the findings of the Iraq Study Group (ISG) and how both sides are ever reluctantly sidling up to that as a basis of a realistic "Kennan-like" way forward in the MidEast at least.

Above all Kennan was key in astutely assessing a virulent lethal enemy, in delineating our true and vital national interests, in basing our policies on our values as a nation, and in tempering what we ought to do with what we were capable of doing in the real world. Such foresight and wisdom are much needed today. I'm not seeing it from weither party but the ISG and the Princeton Project on National Security and guys like Richard Haass have made some good starts.

And jtrem, MacNamara was no strategist but a green eyeshade technocrat. Zbig is much better but he’s no Kennan! Beyond that ISG thing I feel the Princeton Project offers some real good Kennan-like tenents we could build on as a basis of a Realistic Doable Bipartisan Foreign Policy Grand Strategy that couldget us through the next 80 years decinderized – see my post on The 21st Century Final Report of the Princeton Project on National Security:

http://unity08.com/node/1129

DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com

http://milligansstew.blogspot.com

Kucinich is right: if you wanna end the war now ~ stop the funding.....
text "peace"

I haven't seen anything here that begins to sound like a realistic strategy for extricating ourselves from Iraq. I have an idea I'd like to throw into the ring and I'll make it specific (not a glittering generality like so many others have offered). Reduce the current troop level by half no later than this coming spring of 09. Redeploy the remaining troops into three groups.
The first group would be deployed along the Iranian and Syrian borders to keep arms supplies from reaching the various factions they support within Iraq. I'm talking a serious effort and not the half hearted approach we've tried on our own border with Mexico. Nothing, I repeat nothing comes into Iraq from Iran or Syria without being checked. The border with Jordan and Saudi Arabia would also have to be patrolled but with somewhat less intensity as they would be more likely to help in this effort. You need to give the Iraquis better security so they can rebuild the society we shattered.
The second group would help rebuild Iraq's infrastructure and continue to help train and equip the Iraqi millitary and police who would then slowly over time replace the US forces that were providing border security and restore the people's confidence in their democratic government.
The third group would consist of special forces that would hunt down terrorists that have now found a safe haven in Iraq and hit them with all the force neccessary to destroy them.
I believe that this plan could work in a time frame of three to five years and we could be totally withdrawn from the mess we find ourselves in now (thanks for nothing GW). While five years may seem too long a time to be involved for some strident critics, it is probably the best that can be hoped for with the current situation.

BEP - Great comments! What you want hear in the majority of our media or from certain politicians (the Democratic party and some Republicans worried about re-election is seeing the surge starting to show positive signs)is that this is working and has a great chance of success.

If a Democrat, Republican or 3rd party candidate wins the white house we will still be in Iraq for years to come! In my opinion, the majority of the american public wants success in Irag i.e. a plan that has a chance of success instead of what has been going on in the past. Our nation's treasure and blood has a chance of succeeding - a plan that will actually work and this one will!

I am a retired member of the U.S. military. It is dishonest and discouraging to see what is not reported by the media and what some politicians say to get elected. What is encouraging is that political debate continues in this country without tanks, bullets flying and bombs going off in the street.

BEP - I agree with your plan - the surge has to create enough security for the political process to work - your plan follows behind it (need about 6 more months of this present surge to take a solid foothold on the situation in Iraq and it will). Different factions in Iraq have begun to align themselves with us in stopping this terrible violence and take their country back. I suspect the political process will be driven by the people in due time just as the citizens of Iraq are staring to become tired and sickened by the violence.

The New York Times has begun to report on the success of this present surge. They have been a critic of this war for quite some time and how it was being conducted - I disagree with a lot of what the NYT publishes on any isssue but have always agreed on their assessment of how this war in Iraq was being conducted.

You can find mountains of documents and statements on those opposed to this war in Iraq who were staunch advocates for it when it was being drummed up! The majority of these politicians didn't even read the Intelligence estimates on what the current and past administrations were saying about this intel reports. Politicians are like diapers - they should be changed often!

Again, BEP, I agree with your assessments! They are right on! We can finish this job now or be back in Iraq in a few years with a much large cost to our treasure and more importantly in american lives!

For Unity 08 to be a true party.....there needs to be a dog catcher running as a Unity 08 party...

People need to understand who they elect as their locale government officials are important.....

It matters....Support comes from below......If there is no base there is no support....

It may not be a big deal when a congressmans aid answers the phone in Washington.....they expect...

But when your state and local elected officials phones start ringing......thats a big deal.....

They had support from their party to get elected....now they can take the heat right along with their party

Maybe some of them will have the courage or at least the common sense to distance themselves from the two anchor alternatives...

All they have to know is we are watching.....

We can all comment, discuss, disagree, emphasize, critisize and go on about Iraq.

I once fought a very unpopular war, and when I was there, "we were winning" but as usual, those at home who did not sacrafice complained (many being of draft age) and others cried "get out of Vietnam. Many others believed all the lies and bull stories passed from one pot head to another while marching around dancing naked and having fun (many are now involved in our political process today, and are elected officals)!
But besides all of that, we must remember what Dwight D. Eisenhower said when he left the White House and I quote "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist".

War is money and many love money!
Oil is not the reason, heck they (the Iraqis) can't keep the wells pumping and can't ship it either, so what is the real reason? carpet-bagging practices for major companies such as Haliburton and many others.

For those of you not old enough to know and those who never served, the military of today is nothing like it was thirty years ago. All the duties that were once part of military service are now contracted out to civilian companies, aircraft maintenance, supplies, cleninig and grounds maintenance of bases and even the daily routine of feeding the troops is all run by private companies.
Our food was in a can, hot meals came from the mess hall and usualy made in large metal cans by fellow servicemen (women were not seen much back then)! Today meals are served cafateria style, and the cost of each meal served our military personell has risen to obscene levels (thanks to Haliburton)once again.

So in sumation, as long as the elected officials keep passing budgets that are way out of line, and their connections keep getting the contracts, then there is no reason to leave Iraq "IT'S BIG BUSINESS" and it's part of the "MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX"!

I feel for the troops deeply and cutting funding hurts them because the companies contracted to re-supply them will have to make cutbacks to protect the bottom line and the wealth of a few stock holders. Remember, many of our troops have gone back again and again for their country. They sacrificed, now it's our turn, support them while they are there, and lets all find a way to bring em home!

I will close with another Eisenhower quote

I never saw a pessimistic general win a battle.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
34th president of US 1953-1961 (1890 - 1969)

It IS about oil - most foreign countries have nationalized their oil, and Saddam was going to start trading oil in Euros, not dollars, and that was the last straw. We want control of the Iraqi oil, so we wrote the "Iraq hydrocarbon law" which will mandate foreign oil companies have control - it's a tangled web with loan guarantees to the World Bank (Wolfowitz) tied in so the Iraqis can't just do what they want.
You have an excellent point - I keep hearing "free enterprise" with this administration - reminds me of the early days of the industrial revolution when ruthless capitalists could run free - those days are here again! Drug companies can create the Medicare Prescription plan, oil companies can have the Cheney "energy plan", medical insurance companies can withhold care to maximize profits, and yes, as you describe, things that were done by the military - transporting the fuel, feeding the troops, etc., has now been turned over to profit-makers. The Army Corps of Engineers and Seabees used to do much of what Halliburton is lining it's pockets with.
Another byproduct - there are many more American deaths than we know about - many civilian truck drivers, private security forces, etc., have been killed but aren't part of the 3,600+ count we hear on the news.

We need to face some facts (at least my version of facts) about Iraq.
1) Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism - but it is a breeding ground for terrorists now.
2) You cannot win a guerilla war (either Vietnam or Iraq) unless the majority of the people support you - and they don't (and didn't in Vietnam).
"Stay the course" won't allow us to "win" - that won't happen militarily.
3) Our forces in Iraq cannot abruptly go to zero - we should reduce the number, redeploy to near the borders, and intervene to stop massacres, but definitely stop going house-to-house kicking in doors.
4) We need to take our fingers out of our ears and stop saying "Nah nah nah nah" to Syria, Iran, and other countries in the region - and for that matter, much of the world. We need to talk seriously with other countries and look for points of agreement - such as, I don't think anyone wants to see Iraq descend fruther into chaos and more bloodshed.
5) We definitely need a dramatic change in our government - and I don't see that in any of the "front-runners" - not Romney, Hillary, Giulini.... we need a Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Chuck Hagel, Mike Gravel....

US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ

added to header info above:

note2 (rev5):
~ if you want me to support staying in iraq (ugh) then ask your senators & representative to:
1) fund the conflict out in the open ~ identify / institute / deduct for the "iraq conflict tax" on every paycheck in the USA.
2) reinstate the draft with "no" deferments (except for "real" medical needs)
3) impeach bush & cheney.
4) ask your senators & representative @: lnk ~ email your request to congress’

an alternative to funding the iraq war...
how about......
how about a "fund the iraq war" tax.......
and those of you who support bushie can opt "IN"
and i'll opt "OUT"...

If you are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of US by calling for immediate troop withdrowals, if you are bying TY Times with all their wistleblowings on secret programs vital for US security, if you support Pelocy visit to Syria, then you are effectively undoing some of US military actions and US military spending with your actions and with your money.

Your dollar is bitting against my dollar.

The real enemies of the US are sitting in the White House, having planned the attack on Iraq long before the 911 inside job. Bin Laden has been dead since 2024. Ron Paul gets more support from active and retired military than any other candidate, and he is the only one who will bring our troops home. Sadaam Hussein had nothing to do with 911, had no weapons of mass destruction and Iraq had 1,000,000 more citizens alive then than they do now. It is time we quit fighting wars for Israel!

Wrong HC again...Saddam's murder rate from 1991 on if you extrapolate out (from UN's own numbers bewteen 1991 and 2024)to the last 4.5 years unimpeded would have been far higher that 1 million. We have saved lives actually, but we have made more of a a mess and as Powell said - we break (perception of break that is - it was already broken thanks to Saddam and sons) it we fix it. That''s what we need to do now as failure and defeat in Iraq will have adverse consequences for the Mid East and world (Israel or no Israel). Remember the "bandwagon effect" psychology in the Cold War and remember Korea!

DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com

http://milligansstew.blogspot.com

People like yourself can't accept the fact that the war was based on lies and deceit and that 911 was an inside job. When any ruler of a nation makes life miserable enough for his own countrymen they will eventually overthrow him themselves. There have been countless barbaric rulers we have not bothered with in the past. Our founding fathers told us to stay out of entangling alliances and it is apparent that the war in Iraq was a huge mistake. I say support the candidate the majority of our troops support and get them out of Iraq now!

When any ruler of a nation makes life miserable enough for his own countrymen they will eventually overthrow him themselves.

Not always. Sometimes, they have no power to revolt properly. Look at happily starving folks in North Korea or at the joyful population of international bordello under Fidel Castro’s rule. Cheapest sex in the world – it tells a lot about country.

There have been countless barbaric rulers we have not bothered with in the past.

It is because they had no even theoretical capacity to strike US. But look what happens when dictator gains that capacity

Case 1. When Castro became cozy with Soviets and could become a launching ground for Soviet nukes, Cuba was attacked (unfortunately for Cubans, unsuccessfully). And when he got Russian nukes, US almost went to the war of mutual annihilation with USSR (missile crisis)

Case 2. Comrade Stalin (another sample of dictator nobody revolted against) acquired nuclear bomb and logistical means to deliver it to USA. In response to that development USA fought soviet proxies in Korea and Vietnam directly, and in many other places indirectly, through US proxies.

Also it took a concerted Allied effort (with substantial key Soviet help BTW)to defeat Hitler's Fortress Europe and a concerted substantial Allied effort to contain the Soviets so they would wither on the vine just like Kennan (the ultimate Diplomat) predicted. Nothing is inevitable until it happens. War solves nothing but sometimes it does set certain preconditions that allows changes to occur and if it is done in a valid cogent well thought out strategic context. More concerted Allied efforts are need to stave off this new threat. We cannot wing it alone and with a flabby unidimensional strategy - if history teaches us anything!

DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com

http://milligansstew.blogspot.com

The way you are pointing to enemies shows, that your money is also going against the Pentagon's money. It should make you happy.

Now, let's look at your points

the White House, having planned the attack on Iraq long before the 911...

Sure, it is a no-brainier. Iraq had been known to have at least chemical WMD at least since the Desert Storm 1990. Sure, Bush-senior, Bush-younger and Clinton-middle had plans to go to Iraq if danger would become immanent.

…inside job

And with powerful democratic opposition to Bush, with 95% of the media against Bush, you sure have solid proves and hard evidence to such serious accusation.

Because, if your accusation, after 6 years have only loony web-sites as a backing, than it is a bogus accusation, no sane person would believe.

Ron Paul gets more support from active and retired military than any other candidate

I seriously doubt this claim. Which statistical research allows you to make such a statement?

Sadaam Hussein had nothing to do with 911
I am not sure, that it is true. But even if it is, Bush’s responsibility were not just avenge 911 victims, but to protect you and me from another similar or even bigger attack. And you know what? He succeeded at this task for 7 years.

Not bad?

[Saddam]had no weapons of mass destruction

How insightful of you to know that after Iraq was thoroughly searched by US troops and agents for years. In 2024, however, all intelligence services of this and other countries believe that he has WMD. UN thought so too.

Iraq had 1,000,000 more citizens alive then than they do now

Where did you take this figure? Most of them were killed by the fellow Muslims – blame them first. If number is true (and I seriously doubt it), it is not a fact, that they all would be alive today. Saddam could start another war with his neighbor and lose couple millions of his faithful subjects.

It is time we quit fighting wars for Israel!

Israel would be the last country to suffer from Saddam bullying his neighbors into oil embargo against US. It is a US war to protect US from Iraqi WMD and world market from oil embargo.

All the news, internet, newspapers, TV, this site and many more are all filled with such hate that I can't imagine anyone running for president that would not be mobbed by the most hateful words and actions in the history of this great country. The terrorist or anyone who is against the US, here and througout the world, must be truly enjoying watching and reading about us and waiting for the US to self destruct. I don't know where this is going or if it will change but I fear that bad things are ahead. We must find a way to change this sad trend. I would say that most of the people in this country who hate their government, their elective officials, their representatives, their country, etc. have never traveled to other parts of the world. If they did they would realize what we have and maybe would work harder to keep it. I am not going to support this Unit08 movement after reading these blogs. Even though the idea is great and if it works could make a difference, the many members here are filled with the same hateful ideas that the far left and right blog sites are saying. So, I believe this movement is just another sad situation that will just help promote more distructive thoughts and eventual actions against our country.

see ya

I agree and disagree there gipo - we do take for granted a lot of our freedoms here in this country and are very insular in our views of the world for sure. However we disagree though here on these blogs and in our campaigns people around the world underestimate the capacity of the US for adaptation and coming together when the chips are down like they are. Contention may seem unseemly for some around the globe but it is our biggest strenght as long as we make sure we adapt and can come togethere and not fail prey to our particular interests at the jeopardy of the overall National Interest.

Every generation the American political psyche goes thru this morass of contention and eventually finds a way in its own way. So do not write us off just yet - we do have the capacity and wherewithal for self-renewal and necessity IS the Mother of Invention. And remember what Churchill said of America - "Eventually America will do the right thing, but along the way they will explore all other possibilities." We are AN indispensible nation at this period of History but we are not the ONLY indispensible nation.

So I would urge you gipo to have patience with America and Unity and all our many foibles and strengths as I urge America to have patience with the World and all its foibles, diversity,and strengths!

DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com

http://milligansstew.blogspot.com

Gipo, I would like to echo John's sentiments. I think the human species is capable of a wide spectrum of emotions. I think we need to be discriminating to separate the hate from the anger. People are passionate and once we learn more about one another and why people are angry we soon realize that we are not that much different. I think that if you stay around you will see both the anger and a healthy skepticism. By challenging our skepticism we begin to build a bond where we create accord out of discord.

The Pre-Socratic Philosopher Heraclitus said: "Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."

Phil

Join the Unity08 Delegate wiki today! http://unity-usa.org

While good leaders are hard to find, great leaders know how to serve.

gipo if you read john & phils posts thats what i was trying to say with less words.

I had noted, that after your post, all other posts are printed in bold.

Since your signature is also in bold, I suspect that you forgot to close some <strong> tag. Could you check it and in the future try to always close all tags openned in your post.

I also suspect, that your <cite> tag is also not closed, because Italic mode persists as well.

Fixed the tags on my signature, saved, and went back to review. Evidently there is a limit on the length that can be used. The closing tags were cropped. Thanks for letting me know. That's what I get for tacking on too much stuff at the end. Hope it didn't hurt anyone's emphasis.

Phil

Join the Unity08 Delegate wiki today! http://unity-usa.org

I am usually very optimistic. I remember the vietnam war and how it divided our country. But I have never seen such disrespect and anger against our government and many of our elected officials. The language is horrible. Most of the opinions are nothing more than venting anger. I cannot imagine being that angry. If you watch c-span and listen to our senators and congressmen debate it is disgraceful. I hope you are right but I am truly concerned. No good will likely come from such hatred. We have an enemy like no other in our history. They want one thing and only one thing, to destroy us ALL. If that cannot modivate us to pull together then what will.

The first thing that can help us to come together is to focus on our similarities, not our differences. In the case of the Iraq war, our similarities concern our troops. It should never be a policy of the U.S. to send our military on any excursion whatsoever without asking for sacrifices at home too. The point of that being that we are either in it together, or we aren't. If we can't unify at the outset against a common enemy, then we need to take a second look at our policy.

I think if you recognize that behind the 4,000 soldiers killed and 20,000 + soldiers that are casualties, there is plenty of good reason for anger. That number of soldiers reflects hundreds of thousands of families that are directly affected with millions more indirectly affected.

The point is that these types of things are mere talking points on c-span to many Americans but represent real life situations for many more. If no real effort is made from the bully pulpit to make these losses the real burden of all Americans, it will be difficult to deflect the anger and pull together.

The only real effort to pull us together on this issue has been to ask people to remember one date with the advice to go out and get some duct tape and plastic for our windows. No shared burden. The same happened in Vietnam.

One slogan during the days of Vietnam was, "Our country, right or wrong." I think we have learned to be more circumspect about such bumper sticker phrases.

Phil

Been to the Unity08 Delegate wiki lately? Join today!http://unity-usa.org
Lets uncorrupt our government!

~ Etymology of the term " Infidel " ~ an example of religion & cultural diversity in civilization gone bad / mad..............
(aka - the birthing of " acquired " terrorism...lnk to ~ http://unity08.com/node/2107)

i'm thinking, one finds in these forums what one looks for.....ie..." freedom of speech " kinda the way america works (hopefully, out in the open).....hmmm.....
heck, i can't even find agreement among members of my own family.... :-)

~an aside.......
the developers of this site have provided any & all of us the opportunity to "create" forums of our choosing..........to state our position(s) on things......

well put

Pulling out of Iraq would be disastrous for Iraq, the Middle East, maybe the entire planet. I predict al-Qaeda will establish permanent presence in Iraq. Iran and Syria will move in, if not by proxy, then by invasion. They will fund their own side in the civil war, and terrorism will increase exponentially. And they won't stop there. Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan will be ripe for the taking. Imagine two terrorist leaders who deny the Holocaust in charge of half of the world's oil!

I propose we build bases in Iraq, similar to the bases we have in Europe, Korea, and Saudi. We use the bases to help train Iraqi soldiers. Attacks against civilians or our troops will be met with swift and severe retribution (Think Israel in Gaza). Then we reduce our presence in the Sunni and Shi'a areas and help the Kurds establish a mini-state.

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you're reading it in English, thank a veteran.

~ if you want me to support staying in iraq (ugh) then ask your senators & representative to:
1) 1st & foremost: impeach bush & cheney....the madmen who started this insane iraq conflict...
2) fund the conflict out in the open ~ identify / institute / deduct for the "iraq conflict tax" on every paycheck (excl military personnel) in the USA.
~ or perhaps an "iraq conflict sales tax" (excl. military personnel)....a reminder of the sacrifice the "few & their families" are making.
3) reinstate the draft with "no" deferments (except for "real" medical needs)
4) ask your (federal & state) senators & representative @ congress.org: lnk ~ email your request to congress’

i won't believe government even after bush & cheney are outta office!

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you're reading it in English, thank a veteran.

believing gov't is a thing of the past..........

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Container Bottom