Comments on: Pentagon Reviewing Three Plans For Iraq

Options Dubbed 'Go Big,' 'Go Long' & 'Go Home'; Congressman Proposes Fourth Option

Add a Comment See all 196 Comments
by mh4cbs1 November 21, 2006 5:39 AM EST
No Easy Answers?

Withdraw the US troops being used as cannon fodder for the NeoCon Oil horrific, needless War OF Terror. When the foreign occupiers of the Muslem nation leave, the Iraqis will solve the chaos that Bush created.

Then Jail Bush, Jail Cheney for their War Crimes.
Reply to this comment
by joeshields56 November 21, 2006 5:06 AM EST
McCain said, "... you could see Iran pose a greater threat to the state of Israel."

Oh my! maybe we should preemptively bomb Iran! and then Syria! and how about N.Korea for good measure! ...and then send in more troops!!!

--or--

we could stop wringing our hands and worrying like a bunch of scared mice about things that 'might' happen. Roosevelt said, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself". That's truer today than it was then. Our current foreign policy is shamefully based on FEAR.

Let's get back to OUR business in OUR country... there is a much work for us to do here. Let's leave these supposedly "evil" countries to their own devices. If they choose to attack Israel or anyone else, then they are the bad guys and we will have clear justification and World support for our response.

...and in the meantime, maybe, just maybe... by getting our troops off of their precious sacred ground, the "evil" ways of our muslim brothers will just cease. It seems I read something a while ago about foreign troops on sacred ground being the primary motivation for Osama Bin Laden's early attacks.

It's worth a try. It worked for Reagan when he pulled our marines out of Lebanon.

Put the shoe on the other foot. If foreign muslim troops were camped out in your hometown, raise your hand if you think it would be fun to go out and shoot or kidnap and behead a couple of them each night.

It's time to end the Iraqi insurgents fun. Bring our troops home NOW.
Reply to this comment
by frankly6 November 21, 2006 4:48 AM EST
Many experts now agree that Iran and Syria hold the keys to begining to stabalize Iraq. But the Bush administration has been openly hostil towards them from the beginning even when they have made conciliatory gestures to normalise relations.

In May 2003, for example, Iran offered to open up its nuclear programme, rein in Hezbollah and co-operate against al-Qaeda, but was reportedly rebuffed as the insistence of former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice-President *** Cheney.

Since then, an extremely right-wing Iranian president has been elected and things have gotten increasingly tense.

We need real leadership and vision now and it seems to be in short supply from this administration.
Reply to this comment
by j-whitman November 21, 2006 3:28 AM EST
Frankly,,, Iran, Syria & Ossama are the victors in the war
Reply to this comment
by frankly6 November 21, 2006 3:25 AM EST
Iran and Syria may be taking the diplomatic initiative with Iraq now and ultimately making the US irrelivant. They will be the ultimate winners of this war.

Reply to this comment
by j-whitman November 21, 2006 3:25 AM EST
Way,, Saudi's will unite against the USA if Cheney launches just 1 attack against Iran.
Reply to this comment
by wayfedup November 21, 2006 3:18 AM EST
I think it was probably "PHASE TWO" of the BIG PICTURE from day one...
Reply to this comment
by wayfedup November 21, 2006 3:16 AM EST
better let sleeping dogs lie for now...
Reply to this comment
by j-whitman November 21, 2006 3:16 AM EST
Way,, Cheney's been setting that up with his cherry picking of intell.
Reply to this comment
by j-whitman November 21, 2006 3:08 AM EST
SANDBAGGED -- GOP leaves 460 Billion in unfinished spending bills not including war spending yet to come for democrats - MISSION NOT ACCOMPLISHED
Reply to this comment
by wayfedup November 21, 2006 2:39 AM EST
frankly6.....

Were you also a JACOBITE in a past life too...?
Reply to this comment
by rharrin1 November 21, 2006 1:39 AM EST
Staying long will not work. Nothing will work until they are disarmed and requires many more troops. That 20000 is not enough to take the weapons away from them. If they had been disarmed in the beginning it would not be a mess now.

You don't leave them ARMED.
Reply to this comment
by kenshauvin November 21, 2006 1:31 AM EST
At least Bush appears to be soliciting some advice from our military leaders to find a solution to the %u201CIraq problem%u201D. Perhaps by now he has determined that he himself is too stupid to figure out how to get this county out of the mess he got us into for no reason. I hope that he and all of his moron Christian Right Wing supporters rot in hell where they belong for having caused the deaths of nearly 3000 US Troops and countless numbers of innocent Iraqis.
Reply to this comment
by frankly6 November 21, 2006 12:36 AM EST
pakaal


That's exactly what it is. Just a repackaging of the failed stay the course nonstrategy.
Reply to this comment
by pakaal November 21, 2006 12:21 AM EST
Three possible solutions? Try one. The Pentagon has all but said "Go Big" is out due to lack of troop numbers (short of reinstating the draft of course), and Bush says "Go Home" is out. Meanwhile, "Go Long" (the preferred plan of Bush and Pentagon) is as follows:

"Planners envision taking 5 to 10 more years to create a stable and competent Iraqi army."

Sounds like "Stay The Course" to me.
Reply to this comment
by frankly6 November 21, 2006 12:05 AM EST
Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Hell no that's for poor kids to do. I do love the blood and destruction though. As long as it's someone elses son or daughter. So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed, they either have much bigger balls than me or they are desperately poor and trying to make a better life for themselves. Either way, who cares? An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East has proven to be very profitable for a handfull of connected individuals and companies. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, and I really like resoluteness. They may not succeed, some say because they are arrogant and criminaly incompetent. But also we have traitors on the home front calling for some kind of acountability from the administration. The nerve of these peasants speaking truth to power! Who do they think they are? Thay should just shut up and send their money and children into the fight. These traitors have apparently occupied the high ground for now. But not for long..we'll find a way to blame the failures in Iraq on them.
Reply to this comment
by bushrocks1 November 20, 2006 11:48 PM EST
Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. As a hypothetical, I can say, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed but maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country who can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front, being a big one. But now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?... I'm waiting.
Reply to this comment
by tibu987 November 20, 2006 11:44 PM EST
Am I the only one to ever have had this feeling?
If all the politicians in Washington were to serve two years in Iraq in a military uniform, would their outlook change and would a decision as to how to end this war come about pretty quickly?
I'm guessing (yeah, right), that the war would be over quite quickly. They don't have any answers now, sitting in their ivory towers, but they would if they faced the enemy head on.
Washington BS is cheap. As I have asked before, how many of the Washington pols relatives are in Iraq?
'Nuff said.
Reply to this comment
by fascistusa November 20, 2006 11:33 PM EST
This is VIETNAM 2. Look up the History behind Vietnam. Identical to Iraq.

We'll be leaving Iraq with our tails between our legs. The "NEWS/Propoganda" will keep telling you LIES about how bad things will be if we leave. Fear Sells.
Reply to this comment
by fascistusa November 20, 2006 11:30 PM EST
All these empty words. I "think". But few of you "know".

The TRUTH IS... you live in a FASCIST Country.

The Rich run America. War makes them a LOT of MONEY. Our "News" is PROPOGANDA all distorted towards the goals of the Rich. The CHURCH supports the State.
Reply to this comment
See all 196 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more. Watch Now

  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Obama, GOP Clash over cure for Economy

    (298 recent comments)

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: