Presidential Visit?

[Danoinark]

Saw a poll today (Gallup) that said 71 percent of the Iraqis don't want the Americans occupying their country. The poll included all tribes and all religious factions.

[Thom]

Your facts are right about wwII but you left out one little item. We won and had a surrender in less time than we have been in Iraq to this date and we were facing Germany, Japan, Italy just to name few. The countries that we liberated and fought with were on our side. The Iraq people are not. We essentially have replaced one despot with at least three others who will take over the country and desert us when we leave weather it is tomorrow or then years from now.

It's interesting to not that our commander in Chief whom I respect for his courage and detemmination is just next week making a trip to Vietnam on a trip to enlilst that and other asian countries to engage in reciprol trade agreements. Vietman was a nation that Johnsom told us if we lost in our struggle with terrorism with them it would start a terrorist threat across the middle east and communism would eventually control that hemisphere. The domino theory I think was called.

Vietman won and we cut and run in the nick of time rescueing our diplomats and soldiers by air. Vietman and the region is one of the most stable and productive amoung those asian countries. It was a trumped up was based on lies of another administration. The facts that we must rely upon for decisions were manufactured but we as loyal americans trusted the politicians and fought bravely and with honor to defend what we beleived was our future.

Many brave and honorable men and women lost their lives defending the power base of polititians and an industrial military complex. I carried one of those brave soldiers back and forth to the VA hospital in St. Louis several times many of which he was denied treatment for the cancer inflicting his body from being sprayed with agent orange. They said that agent orange did not cause his cancer. Long after his death the VA admitted that the agent orange had caused his and others cancer and gave his mother a small settlement. He was in heaven looking down on the sad state of affairs.

[gonefishin]

The big difference between WW II and the war on terrorisim is that everyone knew who and where the enemy was in WW II

"Everyone we liberated was on our side." Uhhhhmm, France???

The problem is with the resolve of the US. It seems a lot of people want this war to be like an Sylvester Stallone or Arnold S movie. Not gonna happen.

The simple fact is we either fight the terrorists in their backyard or in ours. Personally I would rather go after them but, the citizens of the US spoke in last weeks election. Apparently people would rather fight them on our home soil.

[Al Agnew]

Smartest thing I've ever seen written on what to do in Iraq was an article by Fareed Zakaria in last week's Newsweek. And one of the things he noted, which I've believed for a long time, is that the whole idea of "fighting the terrorists in their own backyard so we don't have to fight them in ours" is pretty bogus. Come on...if you were al Queda, what would you rather do, blow up a few U.S. soldiers and a bunch of Iraqis, or do something else spectacularly brutal in America? If the terrorists had the will and the means, there's no way they'd stay in Iraq rather than doing another attack in the U.S. And there's no way that our being in Iraq is keeping them from it. The borders in that country are porous enough that every supposed al Queda agent in that country can easily leave at any time and at least make the attempt to get into the U.S. and do something. So I've never understood just how our being in Iraq is keeping them from coming over here. Seems to me that's just one more simplistic slogan with little basis in fact.

You'll never convince me that Iraq ever had anything concrete to do with fighting terrorism. Saddam may have WMDs. But even if he did, he wasn't going to give them to terrorists, he was going to use them himself or keep them as a threat. And he was never willing to let terrorists use his country as a base, because he viewed that as a threat to his own power.

Nope, I have always thought that the biggest (unstated) reason for invading Iraq was to replace the regime with one either friendly to us, or beholden to us, in order to stabilize and secure the second largest oil reserves in the Middle East. And no, it wasn't about the price at the pump or even about the oil companies. It was about having a source of oil to replace Saudi oil if the Saudis ever get kicked out of Arabia (which is far from unlikely). Geopolitically, it only makes sense, given that this country's economy still depends upon oil, and having more secure sources of it will be all-important in the future, hopefully until we can develop other energy sources. But we couldn't just come right out and say it, so the Bush administration started out stating it was because of Saddam's WMDs, then when that didn't quite pan out because we couldn't find them, it devolved into a bunch of other reasons.

Don't get me wrong. I'm still not convinced that invading Iraq didn't have some justification. And I'm not advocating just getting out at this point. I don't have so much of a quibble with Bush's decision to invade Iraq as I do with the way the aftermath of the successful invasion was handled.

[Danoinark]

I have to agree with Al. Now I am not saying "cut and run" but there needs to be a beginning of an end here. Some type of organized withdrawal needs to be considered. I think our purpose has been served, especially in light of the clear understanding that we are not wanted there by the people of Iraq. We have run amok in these religious wars in places that have been waring for eons. For those that say we need to fight terrorism on their front, consider if you will the vulnerabilty of our own shores as Al pointed out. Think what protection our soldiers could provide at our own borders and ports. Please don't misunderstand me. I do support our troops I am just not convinced the continued occupation of that country has produced any concrete results. This war/occupation has lasted longer than our involvement in WW2 as Thom pointed out and was fought because of what the Allies and US knew as an afront to world domination. I am independent politically, but I suspect one could call me somewhat of a Libertarian in these kinds of issues. I am tired of taking care of other countries butts where we are not wanted and when there are so many domestic issues that need to be addressed.

Dano

[MTM]

My porblem is with the way the media uses things and blows them out or up just to get people to think as they do. Like I said you neer hear about the good our troops are doing over there. Just the bad that is going on. I do believe that things are much better than they were 6 months ago. That because I have a close friend that is stationed there.

I think our biggest mistake was not taking the whole areea on at one time and being done with it.

As for us torturing people that is a bunch of crap they just wanted to make the war look bad and they did. If I thought I could get information out of a prisoner by putting panties over his head you had best bet he would be wearing them a lot and they might even be dirty. If I remember right when J. Lynch was taken she had 8 other solders with her. They were taken prisoner along with her and were all killed and thrown in a mass grave. Seems every war the good old US is told to be nice but all the rest do as they dang well please. Get's old.

I find it funny how the Editor of the New York TImes can out Top Scerets and get away with it. What I really find funny is that people from New York let them get away with it. If the people we are fighting use any of that information to have at us again were do you think they will hit? It sure won't be were I live LOL. If I lived in New York I would be looking up that Editor.

I guess we will see what will happen will hwppen nothing much can be done now. But I bet the Dem's don't pull out as they wnat to.

By the way Thom I am a two tour Vietnam Vet. I also am fighting cancer do to Agtent Orange. At least that is were they think it came from. I just had my 4th Major surgery on it 4 weeks ago. I was in the hospital for 10 days or so. Got a little pneumonia while I was in the hospital so I ended up staying longer than I wanted to. I do know a thing or two about Agent Orange. I am doing OK and no longer have Cancer but it sure hasen't been any fun. I do think the good Lord for healing me and watching over the rest of the Vet's in this country. There are a lot of them worse off than me. All I can say is God Bless and protect them all. Ron

[Crippled Caddis]

Perhaps a look at an alternate future predicated on the Democratic desire to 'cut and run' from the Near East might fuel some thought. A look at plausible results of that policy may be read here:

<http://therant.us/staff/kraft/10242006.htm>

********************************************************************************

"Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purpose is beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."----Justice Brandeis

********************************************************************************

*

"The majority of pacifists either belong to obscure religious sects or are simply humanitarians who object to the taking of life and prefer not to follow their thoughts beyond that point. But there is a minority of intellectual pacifists whose real though unadmitted motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration of totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but if one looks closely at the writings of younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the United States".--George Orwell

[gonefishin]

Smartest thing I've ever seen written on what to do in Iraq was an article by Fareed Zakaria in last week's Newsweek. And one of the things he noted, which I've believed for a long time, is that the whole idea of "fighting the terrorists in their own backyard so we don't have to fight them in ours" is pretty bogus. Come on...if you were al Queda, what would you rather do, blow up a few U.S. soldiers and a bunch of Iraqis, or do something else spectacularly brutal in America?

Fareed Zakaria huh Well it appears me Fareed should put a little bit of thought into opinions before putting them down on paper and looking ignorant for it. Sure Al Quida would love to make a spectacular attack on US soil but the simple fact is that the more of them we keep tied up elsewhere the less there are to creat havoc in this country. Really it is a simple function of math.

I would bet the Dems change their tune now that they are in power. I don't believe that they were/are actually against us being in Iraq but rather they were upset that they arent in charge.

[LostMyWife]

Joining in a bit late, but i also do not think the DEM's will get us out of Iraq. History should tell us that. Also, while this war or occupation has lasted longer than WW2, if you take into considereation the amount of time we "occupied" the defeated country, as is the case now, I think we are still a bit behind.

I am not a vet. My lottery number was 4 when Nixon killed the draft. I have the upmost respect for those that served and continue to serve.

Regardles of why we went, or why we are still there, we need do need to get out. But we need to leave a stable government in place so that we do not have to go back again in a few years. Deja Vu

[Crippled Caddis]

You can forget that concept right up front. We're NOT dealing with a people who are in the Western sense 'civilized'. The population is composed of numerous tribal factions who have been killing each other for generations beyond memory. It is a signal part of their mindset, way of life and deeply ingrained tribal tradition. These are people who even within the current generation are still in the tribal level of existance. You can dress them in Western wear, send them to Western institutions of learning and when the chips are down they instantly revert to type. Intolerance is one of the cardinal virtues of Islam and it extends not just to 'infidels' but to other tribal groups. They have been killing each other for fun and sport since their very existance as tribes began. There are ancient enmities at work at the deepest levels of their subconscious that cannot and will not be expunged by mere words on a document or constitution. The sole thing they can agree on and act in concert about is that most basic Quran injunction to convert, enslave or kill all 'infidels. There is no other course open to the devout Muslim. That is the disservice our leadership and media have done us, they have repeatedly insisted that Islam is 'a religion of love". Nothing could be further from the truth. It is a religion of hatred. It is the chief exhortation from their prophet. The Muslim is dedicated to religious war from birth as the spread of Islam by violent means is the chief facet of the religion. Even a brief study of the Quran will verify my words.

Forget peace in the region It simply isn't in the cards. Tom