Losing Patience On Iraq?

[GeauxTo]

Poll: USA is losing patience on Iraq (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-12-poll_x.htm)
(06/13/2005 © USA Today)
Nearly six in 10 Americans say the United States should withdraw some or all of its troops from Iraq, a new Gallup Poll finds, the most downbeat view of the war since it began in 2003.

Another temporary opinion captured in a poll Kodak moment. These feelings vacillate in too quicksilver a manner to govern based on any poll save the one conducted on the first Tuesday in November.

[GAMECOCK_FAN]

We're there (regardless of whether each of us thinks we should have gone in the first place or not). Since we're there, we should stay as long as necessary.

[cocky4ever]

Well, the number of U.S. casualties has now reached over 1,700. Half of them occured over the last year. It doesnt seem that things are getting better. If we dont set a time line then we're just gonna be there forever. That being said though if we set a timeline the terrorists will just get ready to take over when we leave. Obviously we're in a bad situation. I wonder why so many people dont hold the people who got us in this mess accountable for their actions.

[scunyon]

Well, the number of U.S. casualties has now reached over 1,700. Half of them occured over the last year. It doesnt seem that things are getting better. If we dont set a time line then we're just gonna be there forever. That being said though if we set a timeline the terrorists will just get ready to take over when we leave. Obviously we're in a bad situation. I wonder why so many people dont hold the people who got us in this mess accountable for their actions.

Because money is driving this and all those fat cats in DC are reaping the benefits. The sad part is, it was exposed with the Haliburton mess and they put enough snake oil on it to slip it out of the American conciousness. A crock of bullpie if I've ever stepped in one.

There is an idiot in the White House who couldn't lead a seeing eye dog from under a picnic shelter surrounded by a bunch of yes men and women who get paid big bucks to stroke his ego :mad:

The only good thing he did was keep the electric chair busy in Texas :eek: All research done on him indicates he is an utmost failure in everything that he has been involved in, but through name recognition and a lot of moolah, he is the President.

His only success since residing on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is leading the country down a slippery slope into bankruptcy.

But more to the point, if his precious little alcoholic sluts, 'scuse me, daughters were to go over there and get bullets chunked at them, he would understand the way that every family with a relative over there feels. He knows that we are in over our heads, but he doesn't want to be the President to go down in history as the one who had to cut and run.

Everybody that re-elected him should be as busy as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest, kicking themselves in the ass!

[Neo]

His only success since residing on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is leading the country down a slippery slope into bankruptcy.



I wouldn't say that. Stuff happens that you have NO control over, but you must react. A lot of people seem to forget what started this nation's deficit. This whole shabang started with 9/11.

Overall, I'm pleased with what Bush has done. He's put more of my money in my pocket where it belongs. :cool:

[SeattleGamecocks]

I wouldn't say that. Stuff happens that you have NO control over, but you must react. A lot of people seem to forget what started this nation's deficit. This whole shabang started with 9/11.
Those $300 checks we all got in 2001 started it, followed by corporate tax breaks. It was as if the administration was opposed to the god awful surplus they were given. Yes I took my money too and feel in part responsible.

About Iraq, I want to say get the hell out now, but realistically if we want to save face, we need to stick it out. Set a date and build them up as much as possible and pull out. Make that date sooner rather than later. I do think they will break into civil war when we leave, but we need to make the effort, since we've created the unstable nation inviting terrorists. If you think about it, W is a prophet. I've never read any rules about prophecy but to my knowledge its okay to fulfill your own prophecy.

[scunyon]

This whole shabang started with 9/11.

On that point, I'll agree. However, we were supposed to be chasing Bin Laden. Iraq may have al Qaeda members hiding there, but you can't convince me, nor is there any empirical evidence to link Saddam and Bin Laden.

IMHO, W. is only out to finish what his Daddy couldn't do (or was prevented from doing) in reference to Saddam. He was itching to go over there and made it clear that he wanted there to be a link between 9-11 and Saddam that has never materialized. You would think that when all of his pole polishers told him that they were wrong, he would have "manned up" and gotten those troops out and be diplomatic, but he's burned all of bridges at the UN.

BTW, when I said bankruptcy, I meant with the way that the economy has gone since 9-11, that so many people have gone bankrupt/foreclosed, etc. that it's unreal :(

[Neo]

but he's burned all of bridges at the UN.


The UN is a joke. Everyone knows it. The French & Germans both were funneling Saddam's money through illegal channels and disguising it as the "Oil for Food" program.

Since when did we have to consult the UN on American soverignity? The UN is made up of communists, dictators, monarchs and a whole lot worse.

As a matter of fact, for those that don't know, the UN was created on the foundation of Anti-Americanism. When the UN General Assembly was first created, it was created and geared against the USA. For example;

The United States had 1 vote in the UN General Assembly.

China had three. (3)
Vietnam had two. (2)
Soviet Union had four. (4)

Hell, even Cuba had two (2) votes.

What's wrong with this picture? :cool:

[OrangeCrush]

I do believe the Armed Forces should stick it out, but I went with other options because of what I would like to see done in Iraq. The amount of US forces should be upped and it is time to clean house hard. Set a firm date for withdrawl and do everything possible to make it work. There will be a backlash in Iraq once the troops move out of the country, but that is going to happen regardless of when the troops leave. It is time to raise the bar for expectations of how quick Iraq can be put back together. You would think that with the Republicans controlling most of the goverment that they could get together and find a plan that works. If this draws out for a few more years, then republicans will face the backlash when it comes to elections. People are getting tired of more American deaths over there.

[fernandomike]

The UN is a joke. Everyone knows it. The French & Germans both were funneling Saddam's money through illegal channels and disguising it as the "Oil for Food" program.

Since when did we have to consult the UN on American soverignity? The UN is made up of communists, dictators, monarchs and a whole lot worse.

As a matter of fact, for those that don't know, the UN was created on the foundation of Anti-Americanism. When the UN General Assembly was first created, it was created and geared against the USA. For example;

The United States had 1 vote in the UN General Assembly.

China had three. (3)
Vietnam had two. (2)
Soviet Union had four. (4)

Hell, even Cuba had two (2) votes.

What's wrong with this picture? :cool:

The U.S. has one of five permanent seats on the Security Council. The power in the U.N. lies almost entirely within the Security Council. If I remember correctly, a veto cannot be overridden meaning that the U.S. can kill any measure that it so desires.

[WayzUp]

We will be fighting this war or one exactly like it for all time until our elected leaders get it in their heads that the reason they hate us is because it's what they're taught in their schools. Just as we're taught about freedom and liberty and standing up for what you believe in, no matter what they cost; they're taught that our ways are evil and corrupt & Allah wants Americans dead. We know it's not all of them, we just don't know which of them are, and that is the problem.

However, I believe this systematic teaching hatred of Americans and democracy isn't as widespread as we're led to believe which would account for the vast number of non-violent Muslims who have no problem whatsoever with the United States and its citizens. That's why we have "pockets" of terrorists rather than whole nations of them. At any rate, if the people that have the power to get this curriculum out of their schools (their government) don't like or don't trust the people that have the power to invade and occupy their countries at will (our government), there is no reason for them to stop having a handful of their next generation be taught that we're the Antichrist and should die. It's like it's their only protection against our taking over their countries and stealing their oil.

I say we put a timeline on it, work like hell to make our efforts thus far in Iraq stand up, SLOWLY back away and divert funds from that siege and place it on finally securing our own country like we should have starting on September 12.

[Neo]

The U.S. has one of five permanent seats on the Security Council. The power in the U.N. lies almost entirely within the Security Council. If I remember correctly, a veto cannot be overridden meaning that the U.S. can kill any measure that it so desires.



You didn't read what I wrote...


As a matter of fact, for those that don't know, the UN was created on the foundation of Anti-Americanism. When the UN General Assembly was first created, it was created and geared against the USA.

[GeauxTo]

the reason they hate us is because it's what they're taught in their schools.
Schools?? No... in their mosques. Islam is a universalizing religion that teaches its adherents not to stop until the entire world is muslim. And that includes doing whatever it takes to bring down the non-Islamic nations. Wise up. They ALL want to destroy you. Islam is your enemy. It will destroy every free society on Earth if it can. Look for a moment at the Islamic nations in the world. What do you see? Is that what you want?
;)

[uscrebel]

When we began posturing to enter Iraq I was against it. I felt that we had too much to do in Afganistan and we did not have an endless supply of troops to dump into every backwater that we felt to be a threat. The fact is that we had Saddam pretty well bottled up and the WMD thing never seemed realistic. Remember that almost 40% of Americans felt strongly that neither disposing Sadaam nor find WMD's were credible reasons for an invasion.

Regardless, we are there. What seems important now is having a rational plan to determine when we should leave. Not a specific date, but behavioral signs that tell us that it is okay to leave. Things like restoration of electricity and water supplies, effective healthcare and educational institutions, terror and violence that is at least as infrequent as it is in other Middle Eastern countries.

Setting a date will create one of two problems...Violence will increase to get us to leave earlier...or We will simply bide our time, trying not to get killed until the deadline. Establishing objective behavioral indicators and sticking to them will send a message that we want to leave things safer that when we got there.

[Tator]

Here's an Idea. Tell the "PC" crowd to blow it out their a$$es and let our men and women in unifrom deal with the threats at hand in the most efficient manner that THEY see fit. Get the politicians AND the American general populace out of the military's business. Let them do their job and thank them when it is done.

[SeattleGamecocks]

Here's an Idea. Tell the "PC" crowd to blow it out their a$$es and let our men and women in unifrom deal with the threats at hand in the most efficient manner that THEY see fit. Get the politicians AND the American general populace out of the military's business. Let them do their job and thank them when it is done.
What does any of this have to do w/ PC? PR... well it has everything to do w/ that and the world is too small for it not to be. I think the "PC crowd" is very concerned about the treatment of our troops. Nobody wants them to be treated the way Vietnam vets were and I certainly thank them. They are following orders and their service is greatly appreciated despite the fact that the orders they are given are very ill advised.

[uscrebel]

Here's an Idea. Tell the "PC" crowd to blow it out their a$$es and let our men and women in unifrom deal with the threats at hand in the most efficient manner that THEY see fit. Get the politicians AND the American general populace out of the military's business. Let them do their job and thank them when it is done.

Tator...interesting sobriquet,

The idea behind a democratic republic is that the citizens (the general populace) and their elected representatives (the politicians) are SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE MILITARY'S BUSINESS! A few examples of countries in which elected politicians and citizens were not allowed to question the military would be:

Iraq under Saddam Hussein
Germany under Adolf Hitler
North Korea under that current fruitcake and his father
The Soviet Union under Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, etc.

I am sure that your desire to live in a country in which nobody tells the military what to do can be arranged. From the list above, that would mean North Korea, but I am sure that there are other military despotisms that would gladly welcome another citizen who doesn't question their motives or actions.

[JerryBeeds]

Here's an Idea. Tell the "PC" crowd to blow it out their a$$es
Like this?
http://www.wrrx.com/images/Jerrybeeds/snowblower.jpg :eek:

[cocky4ever]

Tator...interesting sobriquet,

The idea behind a democratic republic is that the citizens (the general populace) and their elected representatives (the politicians) are SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE MILITARY'S BUSINESS! A few examples of countries in which elected politicians and citizens were not allowed to question the military would be:

Iraq under Saddam Hussein
Germany under Adolf Hitler
North Korea under that current fruitcake and his father
The Soviet Union under Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, etc.

I am sure that your desire to live in a country in which nobody tells the military what to do can be arranged. From the list above, that would mean North Korea, but I am sure that there are other military despotisms that would gladly welcome another citizen who doesn't question their motives or actions.
LOL Burned!! Thats gonna leave a mark :D

[GeauxTo]

Like this?
http://www.wrrx.com/images/Jerrybeeds/snowblower.jpg :eek:
Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha
Thanks for the laugh, JB!
:p

[Tator]

Tator...interesting sobriquet,

The idea behind a democratic republic is that the citizens (the general populace) and their elected representatives (the politicians) are SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE MILITARY'S BUSINESS! A few examples of countries in which elected politicians and citizens were not allowed to question the military would be:

Iraq under Saddam Hussein
Germany under Adolf Hitler
North Korea under that current fruitcake and his father
The Soviet Union under Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, etc.

I am sure that your desire to live in a country in which nobody tells the military what to do can be arranged. From the list above, that would mean North Korea, but I am sure that there are other military despotisms that would gladly welcome another citizen who doesn't question their motives or actions.

I understand that the reigns of the military lie in the hands of the people, as they should. However, what I should have made clearer was that if we and our elected representatives give the military a job to do, we should allow them to do it. Not hinder them at every turn because they seem a bit harsh or insensitive in accomplishing what WE sent them to do. The left of this country seems to live in fear of offending those who would wish to cause us harm and this at the expense of soldier’s lives and our security as a nation. They (and you) apparently think that without ever vigilant micro-management, our military would devolve into a roving band of marauders who simply pillage, rape and destroy without thought. I for one know they have the same level of humanity as you or I have and would not revert to some primal force, should we loosen the reigns a bit and allow them more room to do their duty.

Ultimately, my thoughts are to let those who know how to wage war successfully, do so without meaningless babble and interference from those who are ignorant about our enemies and in the methods of defeating them.

[cocky4ever]

Ultimately, my thoughts are to let those who know how to wage war successfully, do so without meaningless babble and interference from those who are ignorant about our enemies and in the methods of defeating them.

Exactly. I couldnt agree more. Now only if we could get our president to listen to this advice. His cabinet repeatedly ignored numerous military general's about what it would take to effectively take over Iraq and set up a new system. While ignoring these military minds who's advice did they take? Wolfowitz' and Rumsfield's. Wolfowitz said that it was hard for him to imagine that it would take more military power to maintain peace in Iraq than it would take to overthrow Saddam's regime. He also said that with the amount of oil in Iraq it could easily pay for the war and the rebuilding efforts.

There seem to be two outooks on the matter. Either A.) The Bush administration believed that somehow these two men knew more than numerous military generals about the best plans to use in Iraq, or B.) They knew these 2 men were wrong(which it's blatantly obvious they were) and listened to them anyway because they were only concerned with their own agenda.

Either way we're now officially screwed.

[WayzUp]

Exactly. I couldnt agree more. Now only if we could get our president to listen to this advice. His cabinet repeatedly ignored numerous military general's about what it would take to effectively take over Iraq and set up a new system. While ignoring these military minds who's advice did they take? Wolfowitz' and Rumsfield's. Wolfowitz said that it was hard for him to imagine that it would take more military power to maintain peace in Iraq than it would take to overthrow Saddam's regime. He also said that with the amount of oil in Iraq it could easily pay for the war and the rebuilding efforts.

There seem to be two outooks on the matter. Either A.) The Bush administration believed that somehow these two men knew more than numerous military generals about the best plans to use in Iraq, or B.) They knew these 2 men were wrong(which it's blatantly obvious they were) and listened to them anyway because they were only concerned with their own agenda.

Either way we're now officially screwed.
Since I cannot give you rep points, I will simply say I agree with you 100%.

[scunyon]

Since I cannot give you rep points, I will simply say I agree with you 100%.

Same goes for me :p