Comments on: Senator: U.S. Needs "A Path Out Of Iraq"

Democrat Jack Reed Says Iraqi Government Will Not Move Forward Without A Timetable For U.S. Withdrawal

[brianbwb-2009]

"You can''t just say oops and run away like a coward does." Posted by dumbshun

So you stay there, and continue to kill them for no reason? This is nothing other than ego at that point, and ego is not sufficient for me to support a war.

[brianbwb-2009]

"You think our planes are flying aroud when the Shias go to a Sunni Mosque and blow themselves up and those praying or mournig, and Sunnis retaliating by doing the same to Shias?" Posted by dumbshun

In many instances, yes. What is even more idiotic, is that US warplanes are flying around blowing both sides up.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by dumbshun

Your philosophy is only good if the "enemies" are real. Just calling a country "the enemy" means nothing.

In the case of Castro, he has had a long time to do whatever he might have been planning, what has he done? Why is he our "enemy?" When did this "enemy" ever attack us? Same for Saddam, What made him our "enemy?" When we goaded him to war with Iran, he was our "friend", even though Ollie North was selling weapons to our "enemy", Iran.

Here is the problem, a known liar shouts "enemy!", and you are ready to follow him into death and anarchy, instantly accepting as truth that people who never attacked, or harmed you are now, for reasons which are never explained truthfully, the "enemy".

This is why your philosophy fails, if they really were our "enemy" we can always nuke them. As Gus Savage said, war is obsolete as a tool of foreign policy.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Whatever our mistakes, the realty check is that the cut-and run from Iraq at this point would be the height of the stupidity!..." Posted by dumbshun

Even after knowing that Bush intentionally lied, you still call it a mistake?

It should be clear to you by now, as it is to the rest of the world that this was not a mistake, it was intentionally done to serve two purposes, to try to gain control of one of the OPEC countries, and also as an excuse to loot the US treasury. One of these "missions" has indeed been "accomplished", the other is doomed to failure.

The people who orchestrated this didn''t care at all about the blood spilled, only getting rich, and you think I am the one who is as "cold as ice"?

[apprxam]

U.S. relations with alot of countries are full of ironies. Democracy is a double-edge sword that requires a bit of undemocratic action if one is to force it upon a nation, and that will always be a problem.

The closest we''ve come to it on our own is the Phillipines, Panama and Colombia.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Weren''''t the Kamakazees blowing themselves just as Jihadois are doing now? And do you think we are INSPIRING the Jihadis to blow themselves up?" Posted by dumbshun

Absolutely. Force of arms, and fear of death. The lessons we are teaching them.

We are doing the same thing to them, except we are blowing them up from the safety of fast planes.

[brianbwb-2009]

"In order to correct a mistake should we compound it with an error?" Posted by dumbshun

Great question, the answer is that "our" solution always involves installing a puppet who will kowtow to us, rather than the good of their own people. It is a proven recipe for disaster. As long as we seek to do this, we simply try to fix an error by making another.

The solution is to get out, let them sort themselves out, and hold those who intentionally created this disaster personally responsible, as example for future presidents, and as an example to the world that our concept of "no citizen should be above the law" can work, and by regaining some moral authority by our own example, that democracy can work, it can defeat corruption.

If we want to spread "democracy", we should show the world that it can benefit them to emulate us, right now no one sees anything worth emulating, except force of arms.

[apprxam]

True about US/Battista and the Mob. Cuba''s problem now will be property and the right of return (sound familiar?)

The exiles want their property back, but just like returning Iraqis and Kosavo...property rights lie in those who have it, no matter the method of acquition.

[apprxam]

Iran will be the interim protectorate of Shia Iraq, until they revolt on them

The U.S./ EU aka the willing, will protect the Kurds from Iran and Turkey (semi-inclusion into the EU as a bribe)

The Sunnis will fold under the sway of the U.S., the Saudi, the UN and Exxon/Chevron/Royal Dutch Shell. This is business and business will get done.

[ajmarine1]

Ironic, isn''''t it that Moqtada Al Sadr is the guy the US military hand Saddam over to, knowing he would be lynched before the details of US complicity in his crimes could be brought to light in his trials.

Posted by brianbwb at 02:06 AM : Mar 24, 2008


This might be true, but Al Sadr being a *****, he probably had a hard on for Saddam anyway and couldn''t way to get his hands on him.


The Turkish site Zaman.com adds:

It has been also alleged that Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr was in the room during the execution, and even that a masked al-Sadr hanged the ousted leader. The Saudi daily Al- Mokhtasar claimed that one of the masked men who took Saddam to the room of execution was Moqtada al-Sadr. In the news reported by a witness in the room, he added al-Sadr%u2019s father was killed by Saddam Hussein.

[brianbwb-2009]

"And if we had been smarter we would not have supported Batista and let Fidel Castro and Communism take over in Cuba." Posted by dumbshun

Cynicism aside, you are now correct. Since Batista was a gangster, hated by his people, he fell to Castro anyway. Had Batista been a benevolent leader, and not just a puppet of US slave mongers and Mafia gangsters, he would have had the support of most Cubans, there would have been no need for the revolution.

Castro has been the leader of Cuba for what, 10+ US presidential terms, and we haven''t been able to sit down and talk with him in a civil manner. Just like Saddam, we chose to make him our enemy, he did not attack us.

[apprxam]

Challabi and Al Sadar will never become PM of a peaceful Iraq. Only war and defeat could allow that to happen.

I think Iraq is going to break apart, and maybe, rightfully so. Europe could''nt hold together Yugoslavia, why would Iraq be any different?

[apprxam]

Any direction to democarcy depends on public want, leadership from those in charge and, most importantly, institutions to allow mass participation and interest controls.

Also, economic-social factors are important and having an oil base export economy ain''t gonna cut it. The only oil based economy that''s able to cope with Democracy is that of the State of Alaska!! And guess which came first.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Like I said, I thought they had. Now it looks like Al Sader will get into politics and he could be the next PM of Iraq and if he is, he will embrace Iran." Posted by AJMarine1

Ironic, isn''t it that Moqtada Al Sadr is the guy the US military hand Saddam over to, knowing he would be lynched before the details of US complicity in his crimes could be brought to light in his trials.

[apprxam]

Freedom derives from Greek and Roman ideas and fostered by Western religious resistance; internal and external.

The United States had to go through a War of Independence and Civil War to carry on the path to freedom through painful, cultural change and a whole lot of luck.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Isn''t that what we did in the late 30''s until Pearl Harbor attack woke us up, Mr. Historian?" Posted by dumbshun

If you check your history, FDR wanted into the war so badly that he poked and prodded the Japanese, finally blockading them until they had no choice but go to war against the US. You still buy the BS about a surprise attack on Pearl? FDR knew it was coming, he wanted it, he set it up. By the way, check out Prescott Bush, if you want to know why the US politicians wanted into the war.

[apprxam]

I think the problem is that we''re seeing Iraq with American eyes: Freedom and liberty and all of that. The Neo-cons claimed to want to spread freedom, but that''s a cultural paradigm that doesn''t fit them and others and not at the pace we desire. As long as oil is under their feet, our interest won''t gel with theirs and certainly not democracy.

[ajmarine1]

If you have a "government in exile" waiting for installation, first make sure that it is a popular one, not a cheap con man and wannabe gangster.

Posted by brianbwb at 01:50 AM : Mar 24, 2008


Like I said, I thought they had. Now it looks like Al Sader will get into politics and he could be the next PM of Iraq and if he is, he will embrace Iran.

[brianbwb-2009]

"EXACTLY RIGHT!......Could also be the start of a New Empire="JIHADISTAN"!" Posted by dumbshun

So what, are you afraid of them? I am not.

I personally believe that if our military is doing the job it was designed to do, protect the US, and the US only, no one could successfully attack us, because if they tried, we would nuke them.

You say "If we have to fight a war, we must fight to win-i.e. pull all stops out!", you are correct, but therein lies the problem, we are not fighting a real war. The Iraqis did not attack us, there is no winning when there is nothing to win. We are there because Bush lied, so what is winning, how do you define it?

[brianbwb-2009]

"I was hoping that we had already learned this lessen and we had an exiled government already to step in and make Iraq a great country; I guess I was wrong."
Posted by AJMarine1

You are not alone, though from my vantage point outside the US media sphere, I have friends who knew before the invasion started that Chalabi was a fraud, from their own personal experiences with him, and they were aghast that Bush was planning to install him as the government head. We had discussed these matters while watching the Bush agitprop machine beat the lie drum to war.

Hans Blix, the UN weapons inspector knew there were no WMDs, and even though he moderated his statement somewhat to appease the war mongers, told the world so.

It was only the luck that Chalabi''s frauds came to light in the US press that Bush changed his mind.

If you have a "government in exile" waiting for installation, first make sure that it is a popular one, not a cheap con man and wannabe gangster.