Leaving Iraq, Honorably

[Damocles]

But will it bring more recruits than having the armies of the Great Satan right there, in the flesh, occupying the nation second only to Saudi Arabia in significance to Muslims? I sincerely doubt it. Also, being able to claim "victory" -- and they will make that claim no matter when and how we leave -- will produce a single spike of recruitment. Our continuing presence produces a protracted wave.

As I've said before, I'm no longer convinced we're doing anything constructive by staying. This includes preventing new terrorist recruits from joining up.

I'm not saying that staying forever is the answer, we must jump on correct opportunities. Like the Sectarian Warfare (escalated from violence now)... We must have them take responsibility for quelling that particular issue. Moving outside of the areas with the violence and enforcing the position that Iraq must take this issue on as we have trained enough of their forces for that much, at least... Leaving a presense in the rest of Iraq to step in if they beg for the help and quickly remove ourselves again. As they gain confidence and take care of more area simply leave each region...

In other words, quickly jump on every opportunity to show that we have helped them gain control of their own nation, make them take that control and exit smartly without the need for clearly silly 'face-saving' arguments of "we made a mistake"... Yes, we did make a mistake, are we man enough to fix it before we leave and thus not give such a clear retreat to our actual enemies?

 

[bob]

I am not pretending anything. I say that you lack anything other than anecdotal demagoguery to substantiate your claim that our reasoned departure would create more recruits. And if we clearly state that our mission was to depose Saddam and disarm him, and that we stayed a while longer in hopes of assisting the new government but now realize that our presence is causing more harm than good and we want to let muslims solve the problems between muslims.... you got NOTHING to show that such a reasoned departure would do anyhing like you claim it undoubtedly would.

ok... i get it.. what do you think would have happened if we decided to just let the eroupen's deal with hitler ?

 

[Damocles]

I am not pretending anything. I say that you lack anything other than anecdotal demagoguery to substantiate your claim that our reasoned departure would create more recruits. And if we clearly state that our mission was to depose Saddam and disarm him, and that we stayed a while longer in hopes of assisting the new government but now realize that our presence is causing more harm than good and we want to let muslims solve the problems between muslims.... you got NOTHING to show that such a reasoned departure would do anyhing like you claim it undoubtedly would.

Bullpucky, their current messages speak of the retreat to come already... my "demagoguery" has plenty of evidence. Your supposition that this would "fix" any of that is pretense, plain and clear... You want us out so badly that you are willing to do it without taking responsibility for the mess we allowed to be made in our names. I refuse that. We must be smarter than that...

 

[uscitizen]

Like I said, this situation is different because of the clear element of attacks on US soil that were never prevalent with Vietnam. Pretending that they are exactly the same is again ignoring the large differences between the two. In some ways they are similar, but in important ways they are clearly different.

But do the differences really mattter for this thread. We know what happened after we pulled out of Nam, we do not know what would happen when/if we pullout of Iraq. Judging from the neocons past predictions, I would say reverse their predictions and that will be about what will happen.

 

[Damocles]

But do the differences really mattter for this thread. We know what happened after we pulled out of Nam, we do not know what would happen when/if we pullout of Iraq. Judging from the neocons past predictions, I would say reverse their predictions and that will be about what will happen.

I am no NeoCon, and my prediction on this was right. Every time we wade in without a Declaration we end up in a debacle...

Pretending that my ideas are the same as NeoCon ideation is simply removing yourself from personal conversations that we have had over years.

Yes, I am a Conservative, No, I do not believe the war was a good idea. Yes, my prediction has been correct from the beginning. No, I still don't think leaving without a large amount of forethought would be wise.

As I said, you jump on every opportunity to push them to the front and move us to the back and leave as they gain more control. It's the only way to do this with any sort of appearance of other than "Retreat, they're winning!"

 

[OrnotBitwise]

I'm not saying that staying forever is the answer, we must jump on correct opportunities. Like the Sectarian Warfare (escalated from violence now)... We must have them take responsibility for quelling that particular issue. Moving outside of the areas with the violence and enforcing the position that Iraq must take this issue on as we have trained enough of their forces for that much, at least... Leaving a presense in the rest of Iraq to step in if they beg for the help and quickly remove ourselves again. As they gain confidence and take care of more area simply leave each region...

In other words, quickly jump on every opportunity to show that we have helped them gain control of their own nation, make them take that control and exit smartly without the need for clearly silly 'face-saving' arguments of "we made a mistake"... Yes, we did make a mistake, are we man enough to fix it before we leave and thus not give such a clear retreat to our actual enemies?

I don't believe that they will ever get their police forces or army in shape as long as they can rely on U.S. forces as backup.

I'm not talking about simply pulling out all of the troops at one go either. That's not logistically feasible, for one thing. Some kind of phased withdrawl is clearly in order. It should begin soon, however, since it's already overdue.

 

[maineman]

Bullpucky, their current messages speak of the retreat to come already... my "demagoguery" has plenty of evidence. Your supposition that this would "fix" any of that is pretense, plain and clear... You want us out so badly that you are willing to do it without taking responsibility for the mess we allowed to be made in our names. I refuse that. We must be smarter than that...

They can say anything they want now in their "messages"...if we leave in a rational way and we explain clearly that our mission was to depose and disarm Saddam, not encourage or facilitate a civil war< i strongly believe that it would result in less recruits not more. You have nothing but supposition to suggest that those messages would result in an increase in recruits in that scenario....

so let me get this straight:


you can make suppositions without evidence but claim that I offer only "bullpucky" and "pretense"????? really????

go fuck yourself.

 

[Damocles]

I don't believe that they will ever get their police forces or army in shape as long as they can rely on U.S. forces as backup.

I'm not talking about simply pulling out all of the troops at one go either. That's not logistically feasible, for one thing. Some kind of phased withdrawl is clearly in order. It should begin soon, however, since it's already overdue.

Hence the reason we actually leave the regions in question. Force them to the front, otherwise we will simply be "needed" at every turn.

If you notice my plan above, it certainly includes "phased withdrawal". Every plan I have offered from the beginning has.

 

[bob]

I don't believe that they will ever get their police forces or army in shape as long as they can rely on U.S. forces as backup.

I'm not talking about simply pulling out all of the troops at one go either. That's not logistically feasible, for one thing. Some kind of phased withdrawl is clearly in order. It should begin soon, however, since it's already overdue.

but you think they will get it done better and faster without us ? or withsomeone else for that matter ?

 

[Damocles]

They can say anything they want now in their "messages"...if we leave in a rational way and we explain clearly that our mission was to depose and disarm Saddam, not encourage or facilitate a civil war< i strongly believe that it would result in less recruits not more. You have nothing but supposition to suggest that those messages would result in an increase in recruits in that scenario....

so let me get this straight:


you can make suppositions without evidence but claim that I offer only "bullpucky" and "pretense"????? really????

go fuck yourself.

No thanks... I haven't offered any of that to you, either. When you fail to have words and logic to back you up you end up with only, "Go f*ck yourself!"

Thank you for making it so clear that logic has failed you on this particular issue...

 

[maineman]

ok... i get it.. what do you think would have happened if we decided to just let the eroupen's deal with hitler ?

that is an idiotic comparision without merit.


you guys need to come up with a common spin phrase book..... Saddam was Hitler, remember? We went in and captured this modern day "Hilter" and gave him over to these modern day "germans" to try in a court of law.


try again little boy.

 

[maineman]

No thanks... I haven't offered any of that to you, either. When you fail to have words and logic to back you up you end up with only, "Go f*ck yourself!"

Thank you for making it so clear that logic has failed you on this particular issue...

and what have you offered that would back up your claims that our departing in a reasoned manner with plenty of statements showing that our original purpose had been fulfilled and we wanted to allow the people of Iraq to determine their own destiny without our obviously counterproductive and inflaming presence.... would cause an increase in recruitment?

I'll wait..... but no more bullpucky and pretense....just show me the facts to back up your suppositions.

 

[bob]

that is an idiotic comparision without merit.


you guys need to come up with a common spin phrase book..... Saddam was Hitler, remember? We went in and captured this modern day "Hilter" and gave him over to these modern day "germans" to try in a court of law.


try again little boy.

well, wanst tring to make a comparision, just woundering if you thought that leaving the prolem of " hitler" up to the eroupens to deal with what the outcome might have been... but i get it, we can just stick to name calling

duchbag

 

[LadyT]

Bullpucky, their current messages speak of the retreat to come already... my "demagoguery" has plenty of evidence. Your supposition that this would "fix" any of that is pretense, plain and clear... You want us out so badly that you are willing to do it without taking responsibility for the mess we allowed to be made in our names. I refuse that. We must be smarter than that...

Well, I keep hearing sanctimonious reasons as to why we should stay there, but exactly how do you plan on doing that? What great plan do you have that would quell this violence?

 

[Damocles]

and what have you offered that would back up your claims that our departing in a reasoned manner with plenty of statements showing that our original purpose had been fulfilled and we wanted to allow the people of Iraq to determine their own destiny without our obviously counterproductive and inflaming presence.... would cause an increase in recruitment?

I'll wait..... but no more bullpucky and pretense....just show me the facts to back up your suppositions.

I have offered a clear plan on phased withdrawal... You have offered self-gratification in a way you meant to be offensive. I find myself laughing at your insistence that doing it smartly (as well as quickly) is worse than doing it only quickly with no real plan other than "get out!".

It's okay, you can pretend that I have offered nothing but "Stay the Course!" and wish you hadn't made it so clear that you have no logic to back that assertion up and hence the drop-back to neanderthal-type self-gratification "insults", or you can simply actually read my opinion without the idea that I must be wrong because I belong to a different party and enter a logical discourse on the subject. Either way, I am happy.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,180871,00.html

CAIRO, Egypt — Al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, said in a videotape aired Friday that the United States' recent decision to withdraw some troops from Iraq represented "the victory of Islam."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/10/iraq.main/

"The victory day has come faster than we expected," he says. "Here is the Islamic nation in Iraq victorious against the tyrant. The enemy is incapable of fighting on and has no choice but to run away."

And there are other current stories stating much the same thing. If we do not leave smartly as well as quickly we will wind up handing them a recruitment tool of tremendous value....


Pretending that they are not going to use this "victory" as a tool to recruit is pretending indeed. And shows a lack of knowledge of the current news in the area...

 

[Jarod]

Like I said, this situation is different because of the clear element of attacks on US soil that were never prevalent with Vietnam. Pretending that they are exactly the same is again ignoring the large differences between the two. In some ways they are similar, but in important ways they are clearly different.

"Clear element of attack on US soil"? By who?

 

[Damocles]

Well, I keep hearing sanctimonious reasons as to why we should stay there, but exactly how do you plan on doing that? What great plan do you have that would quell this violence?

Read my previous posts, catch up. I have already offered it several times.

 

[Damocles]

"Clear element of attack on US soil"? By who?

There is this group called Al Qaeda, who are using Iraq as a recruitment tool.... They happen to be there... Or are you pretending that it is only Iraqis fighting the US in Iraq?

 

[LadyT]

I have offered a clear plan on phased withdrawal... You have offered self-gratification in a way you meant to be offensive. I find myself laughing at your insistence that doing it smartly (as well as quickly) is better than doing it only quickly with no real plan other than "get out!".

It's okay, you can pretend that I have offered nothing but "Stay the Course!" and wish you hadn't made it so clear that you have no logic to back that assertion up and hence the drop-back to neanderthal-type self-gratification "insults", or you can simply actually read my opinion without the idea that I must be wrong because I belong to a different party and enter a logical discourse on the subject. Either way, I am happy.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,180871,00.html



And there are other current stories stating much the same thing. If we do not leave smartly as well as quickly we will wind up handing them a recruitment tool of tremendous value....


Pretending that they are not going to use this "victory" as a tool to recruit is pretending indeed. And shows a lack of knowledge of the current news in the area...

That tells us, that whether we withdraw at once, or do a phased withdrawal as you suggested, they will see it as a victory either way. That does not mean there is a direct correlation to recruitment. If anything, one could argue that if they considered it a victory, that there would be less of a need for them to recruit in Iraq. We can play the supposition game all day long.

I'd personally argue that keeping US forces there increases the chance of civilian deaths and destruction of infrastructure at the hands of the US military which as we've seen, will definitely increase the number of terrorists and anti-American sentiment.

 

[uscitizen]

I still say we have a good prediction of what will happen when we pull out. Just listen to the Bushies predictions and reverse them. They have been consistantly wrong about Iraq. If the Bushies say pulling out will increase recruitment then it obviously will not increase it.