Comments on: The Politics Of The Iraq War

Four Years After The Invasion, Almost Everything Is Different In Washington

[random_radar]

"We have never been a conquering, imperial people. We've never needed to be, because our strength is in commerce and culture.
Posted by montraville at 11:34 AM : Mar 19, 2007"

I beg to differ with you. I wish what you say were true, and it should be. But America has become an Imperial power in the last century. We style ourself as the world's policeman, but we have become the world's biggest bully trying to force other nations to do what is in our interests. No one respects us anymore because we use violence to get our way--like the two year olds we are.

[gunnerv1]

I guess I'm an Idiot. (But you will be proved wrong in the long run) These Colors Never Run (unless your a liberal).

[montraville]

"Wars are never winnable. Everyone loses. Yeh you may replace a dictator as in Germany but once that's done, get out "

-Even people who disagree with this will hopefully agree that America doesn't fight wars for simple "victory". When America goes to war, it's to solve a problem, or right a wrong. We have never been a conquering, imperial people. We've never needed to be, because our strength is in commerce and culture.

[tejasdemo]

Anybody who still believes that George Bush is anything but a loudmouth, born again, fruitcake is an idiot.

[tomar0317]

Wars are never winnable. Everyone loses. Yeh you may replace a dictator as in Germany but once that's done, get out. The Germans have successfully rebuilt their country as will Iraq. How it is built and with what type government should not be our responsibility. We helped the Iraquis get started in the right direction, it's their responsibility to continue in that direction or change course as they may. Too many people are casualties in wars, not just the militaries. It's over. It's time for our troops to come home. We're not being unpatriotic as are leaders claim. We're extremely disappointed in our leaders performance. Last Novembers election was a statement by the constituencies. Our leaders, and I use that term loosely, just don't listen!

[huskerarmy]

The United States would have prevailed in Viet-Nam if China and the Soviet Union han not been supplying North Viet-nam.
Gunnerv, But since we didn't prevail in Viet Nam, why didn't the entire world fall like dominos and why aren't we now in the death grip of communism like the right promised we would be?

[huskerarmy]

"So, who are we to believe......the Iraqis or CBS???"
Infidel, Talking about having your cake... Let's not forget that those same Iraqi's who feel they are better off still want us to leave. The fact that they feel they are better off now doesn't give us a pass to stay ad infinitum.

[Razzl]

The Founders did not conceive of a President as untouchable dictator in military matters. It was their belief that the Congress would be the leading body of the tripartite government, representing most closely the will of the people.

Legal experts who make claims about the imperial rights of presidents do so only from the perspective of recent history where presidents have geen able to grab such powers out of politics, but politics must change if we are to avoid dictatorship at some point in the future. We cannot continue to have presidents who can misuse their powers as "Commander-in-chief" and not be reigned in before the damage is done. This started with Kennedy and has be a continuous problem with half the presidents we've had since Vietnam.

I notice these legal experts are also unwilling to acknowledge that the Nuremburg Tribunals, the Geneva Conventions, the United Nations Charter, and the World Court all create legally binding limits on the use of military force which must at some point be honored as our government has signed on to them voluntarily. President Bush and his administration are guilty of war crimes (according to Geneva Conventions), crimes against humanity (under Nuremburg principals) and crimes against peace a(under UN charter) which are all actionable and should be pursued. we need to stop listening to one-sided versions of international law in their defense.

[us_infidel]

"MOST Iraqis believe life is better for them now than it was under Saddam Hussein, according to a British opinion poll published today.

The survey of more than 5,000 Iraqis found the majority optimistic despite their suffering in sectarian violence since the American-led invasion four years ago this week.

One in four Iraqis has had a family member murdered, says the poll by Opinion Research Business. In Baghdad, the capital, one in four has had a relative kidnapped and one in three said members of their family had fled abroad. But when asked whether they preferred life under Saddam, the dictator who was executed last December, or under Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, most replied that things were better for them today. Only 27% think there is a civil war in Iraq, compared with 61% who do not, according to the survey carried out last month."

Yet, CBS reports: "CBS News correspondent Allen Pizzey reports few Iraqis feel there is anything to be thankful for"

So, who are we to believe......the Iraqis or CBS???

[karlimhof]

The Soviet Union would have prevailed in Afghanistan if the United States had quit suppling Osama.
Posted by Gunnerv1


Ahmed Shah Massoud was the man who defeated the Soviets - not OBL - who was his cowardly assassin together with the Taliban.

Besides the Soviets were completely drained financially and physically after 9 years of fighting a myriad of insurgents, Massoud included - like in Iraq.

[bluestardad]

Remember AIPAC, Israeli and Saudi Arabian Neocon Supporters are pushing America to fight their wars for them!

Founded in 1953 by Isaiah L. "Si" Kenen, AIPAC's original name was the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs. According to UCLA political science professor and author, Steven Spiegel, "the tension between the Eisenhower administration and Israeli supporters was so acute that there were rumors that the administration would investigate the American Zionist Council. Therefore, an independent lobbying committee was formed, which years later was renamed [AIPAC]." [SPIEGEL, p. 52].[citation needed] Today, AIPAC has over 100,000 members.[1]
Activities and stated goals
AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation "to ensure that the U.S.-Israel relationship is strong so that both countries can work together" to meet the challenges of "stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, fighting terrorism and achieving peace".[2] It regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. It also provides analysis of the voting records of U.S. federal representatives and senators with regard to how they voted on legislation related to Israel. The New York Times described AIPAC on July 6, 1987 as "a major force in shaping United States policy in the Middle East."
READ AIPAC AD BELOW
http://www.aipac.org/forms/join_aipacClubs.htm

[gunnerv1]

Firststate: You got proof? Then run with it. I'm more that sure that the imbalaced congress will pick up and stumble with it.

[gunnerv1]

The Soviet Union would have prevailed in Afghanistan if the United States had quit suppling Osama. The United States would have prevailed in Viet-Nam if China and the Soviet Union han not been supplying North Viet-nam.

[formrusmcsgt]

But when asked if the war is winnable, Young's response was more one of optimism than anything else. "It has to be" winnable, he said.


It has to be winnable based on what? All wars are not winnable. This response is from an individual who is incapable of accepting that America was led into an unwinnable war. Just because someone wishes a war to be winnable does not make it so.

America believed for over a decade in Viet Nam that we could prevail. The USSR felt that it could prevail in Afghanistan for 12 years.

It appears to me that there are those who a decade from now would say about Iraq "we can win it...just send more troops and treasure"......

[karlimhof]

"Unfortunately, some in Congress are using this bill as an opportunity to micromanage our military commanders, force a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq and spend billions on domestic projects that have nothing to do with the war on terror," Bush, author of The Bush War

That's right stupid - we want the money spect on domestic needs - not your neocon adventure.

I say - like Mr. Silverstein said in NYC about WTC building 7 : Pull it, Congress, shut this show down.

[firststate]

The United States can't put the "Iranian influence in Iraq" genie back in the bottle. It was broken the minute the invasion started.

A nasty reality to be faced is the fact that 95% plus of our casualties die as the result of weapons and other support being pumped into Iraq, but not from Iran. Our good friends the Saudis and the Jordanians supply the Sunnis who are responsible for more than 95% of our casualties. Instead we *** and moan about Iran helping the Shi'ites. Reality check needed.

Until someone slaps W back to reality, no real progress in Iraq is possible. As long as he maintains his delusions, everything that is going on is busy work. His denial of reality is the reason Iraq is FUBAR. Generals know that their stay depends on keeping him happy. They tell him what he wants to hear, making them complicit in the reckless endangerment of our troops.

Until dumbya faces the reality of the situation that exists today, there's not much point to anything else. He has to deal with the war we have, not the war we might have wished to have, to paraphrase rummy. Our military can defeat anyone in traditional warfare, but they are trained, equipped or prepared to win against an insurgency. We would need the 400,000 plus troops Gen. Shinseki tried to tell him about at the start. We don't have them.

Everything goes back to the need to face reality.

[forthepeaple]

The American People are not stupid! We know that if the Democratic Majority does not approve the Iraq War Supplemental Budget Requested by President Bush for the War the War Stops!

IMMEDIATELY No matter who they are, Democrats in positions of Leadership, from the County Leadership to the Leadership of the Congress that do not execute the will of the people, must be removed from their Leadership Positions and replaced with someone that will effectively execute the office in which they are trusted.

CONGRESS FIDDLES WHILE IRAQ BURNS AND BUSH RUNS AMOK!

Write your Representatives and Senators! SHOW THEM YOUR DISDAIN OF THEIR COWARDOUS ACTIONS WHILE OUR TROOPS ARE BEING KILLED AND OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE BEING TRAMPLED ON BY THIS

SO VOTE FOR A REAL AMERICAN THAT WANTS TO GIVE ALL AMERICA BACK TO WHO OWNS ITS AMERICANS, AND HIS MANE IS DAVID A BELANGER FOR PRESIDENT AMERICA CHOICE FOR FREEDOM.. SENT HIM A NOTE AT [e-mail] AND SHOW HIM YOUR SUPPORT

[misha131]

From the Senate Iraq War Debate:

A Senator from both sides said neither side had a plan. To a large degree both sides lack a complete plan -- no definition of success, no criteria for complete disengagement, weak or non definition of the non-military components of the plan (diplomatic and internal projects (justice, police, administration. etc)). Generally there are at leat two Senators with a 1/2 a clue each.

A Senator from both sides said neither has a plan B. In fact the most realistic plan A and B revolve around the two options presented for the military. Surge or Redeploy -- redeployment outside the sight of the Iraqi populace supports the view we intend to leave and allow us to provide greater control of border areas. The surge may provide a short term breather for the Iraqi government to clean up some of it's act. In fact each Senator was again at least 1/2 right neither side has a plan B or the criteria to switch plans.

On the other side if they cooperated they have the pieces of a plan A and B and numerous Senators have suggestions for operating criteria and evaluation criteria to establish complete plans with evaluation checkpoints and a coordinated chance of success.

It is time for both sides to think which is the best complete plan for the country, troops and region and not for their respective careers/parties.

[progressv]

Fredgrad2000 asks:

"How do we turn what has been a debacle to date into something that prevents those who hate us most (and who have attacked us repeatedly) from achieving their goals against us? ... What is all of the distinguished posters here's plans for how to prevent a 'loss' in Iraq from ending up much worse for us?"

Good questions. Here is a radical response. We attack the root causes that make terrorism attractive to young, dispirited folks (at this time, particularly Muslims). We've spent $1/2 trillion on the war already and will spend at least $2 trillion, according to a study by leading economists (including a Nobel laureate), as reported today at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/15/iraq/main2574891.shtml . How far could that much money go in easing the everyday plight of Palestinians, attacking starvation and disease, improving education and medical care, and in other ways showing the U.S. to be a generous and beneficial leader of the world community? Very, very far. (It equals 400 years' worth of direct food assistance to the starving, for one example.) I say we dramatically increase our funding for good deeds in the world as we draw down troops in Iraq and, without ceding any legitimacy to terrorism, we keep asking ourselves why we are targets, face the answers honestly, and address what motivates people to become our enemies. In other words, a long-term solution.

[gkc99]

It is useless to discuss where we might go from here without understanding the arrogance and stupidity of the Bushits who got us here in the first place. Since Bush and his supporters have clearly bungled the situation, their opinions no longer carry any weight! They have no credibility! That is why it is important to understand just how deep a hole the neocons have dug for the US. Helping Iran was one of the risks that was thoroughly presented prior to Bushit's optional war, and he just blew it off. The Bushit style is to threaten, or question the courage or patriotism, of anyone who didn't buy his fairy story. So don't pretend we shouldn't consider how we got here in the first place!