Leaving Iraq, Honorably
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
uscitizen
Villified User
all right, Which of the 3 main segemnts of Iraq would be claiming victory ?
bob
a member named bob
maybe... if they would ever investigate... but you know that will never happen... like the left would want any truth or fact too come out
The "victory" would be claimed by the terrorist groups who are using it as a recruiting tool. You once again fall into the "there is nobody there but those Iraqis" trap of illogic here. This too has already been covered, you like to retrace ground don't you?
Not really, had he not gained the vote before going, etc.. it would help the US to say that this can't be done, but I don't think that any illegalities will be found strong enough to Convict in the Senate so it would simply be wasting money and resources better applied elsewhere and still leave the actual mess in Iraq...
Nothing resolved there but "vengeance" by a political Party...
maineman
Banned
This isn't a european problem...it isn't even a middle-east-wide problem...yet.. It IS an internal Iraqi problem..that we not only created by deposing Saddam but that we continue to make worse by our very presence every single day. It is getting worse, not better, every single day. Do the math. Draw the curve. where does that line lead? How does our riding that line down into the depths of Iraqi civil war make any sense when our presence there only increasing the downward slope of the curve?
uscitizen
Villified User
Nope I don't like to track thru muddy water but once.
The many other things like WMD''s , open arms welcome, and Iraq caused 911 have already been covered very well I think.
So it is just in current conversations that you like to ask questions that have previously been addressed in different words?
maineman
Banned
I am not, nor have I ever suggested that AQ would not spin any move made by America as a "victory" for AQ. What you have yet to show me is anything to suggest that such an approach would result in a net increase in converts to AQ's cause.... especially when counterbalanced by what I believe would be genuine appreciation and relief on the part of a large majority of the arab street and the Islamic world if we were to proclaim that our initial mission had been accomplished and that we wanted to allow Iraqis to solve Iraq's problems and that we realized that our presence there was preventing that.
If the fireman saves the kitten from the tree, the arsonists will not gain too many converts by claiming that the fireman is the great satan for saving a kitten. If we leave - and not precipitously in the dead of night, but at a date certain that all sides know about and that we will honor - and we do our best between now and that date to train Iraqis to provide security and we do our best between now and then to engage other nations both in the region and throughout the world in providing support to Iraq's governmental processes, I believe that such action will result in fewer recruits overall..... and all you can do is post suppositions to refute me.... that, and call my ideas "bullpucky" of course, and then get all self-righteous when I take a little offense at such a mischaracterization..... but go ahead and try.
Like I said, I'll wait.
So, you are presenting basically the exact same plan as I did, then saying, "You are wrong!" so that you can claim victory because I belong to a different party?
maineman, why don't you just stick to suggesting my self-gratification... You sound more logical.
The thing is, if you had actually read my plan with somewhat of an open mind you would see that it is a plan to leave, not to stay, and with the most amount of dignity for ourselves and the Iraqis with the least amount of tools for the terrorists to use for recruitment. Instead you pretend that I have presented nothing that would say that it would be a greater tool if we just leave in the "dead of the night" as you said we shouldn't.
Like I said you can read my posts without prejudice and see that we are in agreement, or you can continue to suggest that I am somehow suggesting something different and then go into how much I should self-gratify.... Either way, I am not the one using illogic to present a "case" for the exact same thing that you present.
maineman
Banned
I am not, nor have I ever suggested that AQ would not spin any move made by America as a "victory" for AQ. What you have yet to show me is anything to suggest that such an approach would result in a net increase in converts to AQ's cause.... especially when counterbalanced by what I believe would be genuine appreciation and relief on the part of a large majority of the arab street and the Islamic world if we were to proclaim that our initial mission had been accomplished and that we wanted to allow Iraqis to solve Iraq's problems and that we realized that our presence there was preventing that.
If the fireman saves the kitten from the tree, the arsonists will not gain too many converts by claiming that the fireman is the great satan for saving a kitten. If we leave - and not precipitously in the dead of night, but at a date certain that all sides know about and that we will honor - and we do our best between now and that date to train Iraqis to provide security and we do our best between now and then to engage other nations both in the region and throughout the world in providing support to Iraq's governmental processes, I believe that such action will result in fewer recruits overall..... and all you can do is post suppositions to refute me.... that, and call my ideas "bullpucky" of course, and then get all self-righteous when I take a little offense at such a mischaracterization..... but go ahead and try.
Like I said, I'll wait.
Duplicate...
Here was my answer:
So, you are presenting basically the exact same plan as I did, then saying, "You are wrong!" so that you can claim victory because I belong to a different party?
maineman, why don't you just stick to suggesting my self-gratification... You sound more logical.
The thing is, if you had actually read my plan with somewhat of an open mind you would see that it is a plan to leave, not to stay, and with the most amount of dignity for ourselves and the Iraqis with the least amount of tools for the terrorists to use for recruitment. Instead you pretend that I have presented nothing that would say that it would be a greater tool if we just leave in the "dead of the night" as you said we shouldn't.
Like I said you can read my posts without prejudice and see that we are in agreement, or you can continue to suggest that I am somehow suggesting something different and then go into how much I should self-gratify.... Either way, I am not the one using illogic to present a "case" for the exact same thing that you present.
Mostly who we are fighting in Iraq is religous factions... not Al Queda.
Al Queda was not in Iraq till we attacked.
bob
a member named bob
There you go spreading facts Jarod. You know you are just confusing the heck out of the neo's ?
not a fact... an assumtion .... based on what evidence we have...
thats like saing AQ wasnt in the USA until 9-11
Does this mean that they are not now? Come on. Preventing the "attack" has already proven to be a bit on the hindsight thing...
Please. I never made any assertion that they were in Iraq before we got there. Really, saying that they weren't there before doesn't change the fact that they are there now.There you go spreading facts Jarod. You know you are just confusing the heck out of the neo's ?
OrnotBitwise
Watermelon
Not just an assumption. Remember the 9/11 Commission Report? Even that limp-wristed document indicates that the only substanciated al Qaeda presence in Iraq prior to March 2003 was in the Kurdish region in the north, far beyond Saddam Hussein's sphere of influence. And that was just one, solitary training base.