Who wants to stay in Iraq longer?

[kres24GT]

Dems want to stay there to make Reps look bad. Reps want to stay there to try and save face for their blunders. Meanwhile the troops keep dying and the tax players keep footing the bill.

Will you vote for a party who actually wants to leave Iraq in 08 or the same old crap?

[Bill]

I want to stay there.

Both to destroy the republicans, and to get the oil.

I win either way.

[kres24GT]

Bush wants to cut and run now.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296680,00.html

[Bill]

He's a pussy. He couldn't fight his way put of a wet paper bag.

Leaving aside the military regulations that, as I recall, require him to bring back 5,000 this fall and 30,000 next spring.

What a surprise - I gather Bush says he'll bring home 30k next year, too.

[newclothes]

Did you hear what Petraeus said:
"I Don't Know" if Victory in Iraq Will Make America Safer.

Uhhh? Hello? Then why the hell are we there.

Watch the video:
http://politicalfups.com/story.php?title=Petraeus_I_Dont_Know_if_Victory_in _Iraq_Will_Make_America_Safer-1


_________________________________
White House celebrates Rosh Hashanah a week early
http://www.PoliticalFups.com

[disrupter]

Petraeus lost 190,000 weapons to the Iraq blackmarket, completely unaccounted for.

Petraeus trained security forces are nothing more than Shiite death squads.

Now he hand wads of cash to Sunni insurgents who are already guilty of ethnic cleansing.

Seems to me the sooner we get this jerk out of Iraq the better the whole situation will be.

The sooner we get all of the US military out of Iraq the better off, safer, the US will be.

The pentagon INTENTIONALLY squandered/wasted 9 BILLION dollars a big chunk of which passed to the hands of Al Qaeda & Insurgents.

The US military has done nothing but increase the violence, crime & lawless civil war & terrorism.

The US military in Iraq is supporting terrorism ON EVERY LEVEL, & acts as a direct enemy of the American people.

[mwillman]

Democrats dont want to stay. Its the republicans that keep blocking legislation that would get us out of there.

Bush is basicly saying stay the course until he is voted out of office and the republicans in congress are giving him his wish.

This country wont be able to get back on track until we vote as many republicans out of office as possible.

[kres24GT]

Democrats dont want to stay. Its the republicans that keep blocking legislation that would get us out of there.




LMAO ............

[mwillman]

Why are you laughing KRes cant you do math.
Its takes alot more then 51 votes to over turn a veto and the republicans have been in lock step for years letting bush do what ever he wants.

[radioguy]

Dems want to stay there to make Reps look bad. Reps want to stay there to try and save face for their blunders.


You see, I was right.

The majority of democrats, liberals, and the people on the political left in America, see the war in Iraq just as kres24GT does. To them, it's nothing more than a political game. They view this war as "Bush's", not America's.

Those troops are AMERICAN troops, not republican troops. This war is being fought by the United States of America, not the Conservative Republicans of America. It isn't about politics, it's about protecting America from the growing threat of world wide Islamic terrorism.

We (that's right, WE) went into Iraq because Intelligence reports believed that Saddam had wmd, and based on the fact he was a "terrorist friendly" dictator who refused to account for the wmd, that he himself had declared he possessed, we were left with no choice but to remove him from power. This was not done based on one mans decision, it was done based on the unanimous consent that the president got from the 3 bodies. Those 3 bodies were the Senate, the Congress and the majority of the American people. GOT IT!

No matter how hard you wish it was true, or how many times you lie to yourselves and others on bulletin boards like this one, it will never change the fact that the war in Iraq is not Bush's, the Conservatives, or the Republicans war... It is AMERICA'S war and whether you care to realize it or not, your attacks against "Bush's" war, are really attacks on America and her troops.

[Bill]

Interesting model, radioguy.

What you offer as the primary reason to stay, the wellbeing of the troops, the most anitwar left and a large percentage of dems say is the reason to withdraw immediately.

It pretty much follows the model of conservative vs liberal moral principles that I was posting about.

Loyalty to the group. And respect for the lines of authority. It's a different set of moral compass points.

I think all humans have these moral traits - but for liberals they are trumped by the fairness and harm moral principles. I wonder if for conservatives "fairness & harm" are even with loyalty/authority/purity, or experienced as less important than loyalty/authority/purity?

[radioguy]

Interesting model, radioguy.

What you offer as the primary reason to stay, the wellbeing of the troops, the most anitwar left and a large percentage of dems say is the reason to withdraw immediately.

It pretty much follows the model of conservative vs liberal moral principles that I was posting about.

Loyalty to the group. And respect for the lines of authority. It's a different set of moral compass points.

I think all humans have these moral traits - but for liberals they are trumped by the fairness and harm moral principles. I wonder if for conservatives "fairness & harm" are even with loyalty/authority/purity, or experienced as less important than loyalty/authority/purity?

The primary reason in my opinion for staying, is not the "defeat the terrorist" aspect of the war, but something else.

Honor.

We as a country made the decision to overthrow Saddam by invading Iraq. Whether people feel that it was the right thing to do or not, is a mute point now. We gave our word to the Iraqi people and to the world, that we wouldn't just take Saddam out and leave Iraq in chaos. We made a commitment to stay there until they had a stable government in place that could defend itself and protect it's people. We promised 25 million people that American forces would see this thing through and wouldn't leave until the stability of their country was returned to them.

If we were to go back on our word and pull out now, Iraq would make the Palestine territories look like a day at Disneyland. The violence, bloodshed and genocide that would follow our departure, would forever change how the people of the world view the United States. We would lose all credibility as being an honorable nation, and our word wouldn't be worth a dime. Not to mention the the fact that Iraq would end up being the largest terrorist ruled country in the world, that would end up attacking us and it's neighbors in the region, again and again in the future.

When both the democrats and republicans overwhelmingly voted to authorize the president to take military action if Saddam did not fully comply with UN resolution 1441, that made the war in Iraq "America's war", not Bush's. What the democrats and the far left in this country are proposing, is for the United States to break the promise it made to the people of Iraq, and to the nations of the world, and leave Iraq and it's people to perish.

Make no mistake about it, if we allow the democrats to have their way and pull out of Iraq before the job is done, the United States, not just president Bush or the democrats, the UNITED STATES, will be held responsible in the eyes of the world for the demise of that country and the slaughter of untold thousands, if not millions of innocent people.

We gave our word as a country, that we wouldn't abandon Iraq. Don't you think we need to HONOR that commitment?

[kres24GT]

Why are you laughing KRes cant you do math.
Its takes alot more then 51 votes to over turn a veto and the republicans have been in lock step for years letting bush do what ever he wants.


What veto is needed? Just stop funding the war.

[disrupter]

It is traitors like you, radioguy & bush who left wounded troops quartered with rats & mold.
It is traitors like you who left troops with post trauma & kicked them out of the military, calling it a 'pre-existing condition', instead of providing them with their due recovery help.
It is traitors like you that left troops & vehicles unarmored & vulnerable to IEDs.
It is traitors like you that are expecting the military to make up for wildly stupid war projections that had not one iota of basis in fact.

You are a traitor to truth, facts, science which is why you in the end are a loser & self-defeating,
the question is, will America allow you to drag it down into YOUR insanity.

You are a traitor to America.

Further we have a CIVILIAN controlled military as our founding fathers determined was best.

We are not a military junta, we have a democratic republic that decides what the military & troops should do & not the troops telling the nation what they will do because that is what they 'feel' like doing.

The tail should not wag the dog.

you & bush are disgusting,
a filthy shame to America & all its values.

[Bill]

We gave our word as a country, that we wouldn't abandon Iraq. Don't you think we need to HONOR that commitment?

I was saying stuff like that when I first started posting here month's ago.

I wasn't couching it in terms of a "loss of honor". but as a moral obligation to help the people that we wrongfully attacked, to make amends for the damage we had done an innocent country.

I still feel much the same way.

However, the way the war has been managed, and our occupation conducted, it's been impossible for me to deny that in many ways our military is, for all practical purposes, torturing the whole population of the country we wronged.

So, as things stand now, while I still see a massive moral obligation to the iraqi people, and while our military has a great guilt it needs to make amends for, I no longer believe our military is capable of being a moral force for good in Iraq.

However, we will still be staying because of the oil.

[mwillman]

Thats just stupid radioman and I for one have no problem telling you that.

It is Bush's War and all your lies are nothing more then a smoke screen to hide you own personal bias which seems to be a pro war nationalistic nimrod.

[Jennifer]

I say we invade Canada for the oil. They are the number one provider of oil to us, and our troops can come home on weekends for liberty! It's a win/win!

[mwillman]

We dont need to invade canada they are already under our shadow same with mexico.

[Jennifer]

Don't tell the Canadians that. They think, and rightly so, that they are a soveriegn nation in their own right, despite the NAFTA BS that Clinton shoved down their throats.

[Linkster]

Its a shame that Bush just reauthorized the NAFTA when all of the dems and even his own party were calling against it - at least they were able to stop the truck parade out of Mexico

[radioguy]

Thats just stupid radioman and I for one have no problem telling you that.

It is Bush's War and all your lies are nothing more then a smoke screen to hide you own personal bias which seems to be a pro war nationalistic nimrod.

And what "lies" would you be talking about?

Hope you have proof to back up your accusation, because I have history to back up mine.

[TheCenturion]

And what "lies" would you be talking about?

Hope you have proof to back up your accusation, because I have history to back up mine.


LOL..What history might that be. Your mental health jacket? That won't fly.

[disrupter]

Jennifer advocates invading Canada for oil.

neonut, i rest my case.

lol

thx Jenny for winning my argument for me.

[TheCenturion]

Jennifer advocates invading Canada for oil.

neonut, i rest my case.

lol

thx Jenny for winning my argument for me.


LOL.. All of these right-wing psychopaths are exactly the same. The GOP has long ago ceased to be a reality based, responsible political party. Now, it's just a cult of murdering, marauding, criminally insane loons and incoherent wackos. But, I guess they need a political party, too. Whatever....

[Linkster]

The simplest answer to all of this is history - if you know what has happened in Iraq over the last century - you would have your answer

Britain went through the exact same discussions with their population (the British people called on their government to stop intervention and fuding in Iraq) in the 1920s and 30s - the exact same conditions existed at the time with extremists, Iran, Syria and others. Britain pulled out and left two air bases in case another country tried to invade, and left a democratic government in place that they had let the Iraqis form themselves - the only intervention was to require that Iraq join the league of nations which they then did in 1932 becoming an independent state and remained a democracy for decades.

All of this was after years of Churchill using poisonous gas on tribes in the north and killing tons of civilians - and was the smart way to handle getting Iraq to a democracy

Unfortunately current leaders of no sense of history - and as usual - those tha do not know history are doomed to repeat it as a great man once said

The answer for the US right now is to pull out military and financial support - require the Iraqis to sign a treaty with the US that they will form their own government and start acting per their member status in the UN - in return we will provide cover if they are attacked from the outside

[Bill]

I say we invade Canada for the oil. They are the number one provider of oil to us, and our troops can come home on weekends for liberty! It's a win/win!

Yes, we're familiar with that rhetorical argument.

However, Canada is not an OPEC nation, and part of the strategic theory of Iraqi oil is that it would be an OPEC-killer.

And, that the oil in Iraq is a unique strategic prize, being the last remaining known untapped superfields of light sweet crude. Under this theory, control of that oil means military domination over the planet in the 21st century. Because light sweet crude can be distilled into military grade fuels faster, cheaper, cleaner, and more easily than the heavier, dirtier oils that are found in most of the places around the world.

If it's true that the Ghawar field is about to collapse, the Iraqi oilfields then become unique on the planet.

We can argue about wether the original goal of the war was to grab the oil, or to secure the oil, or if the importance of the oil only occured to the war planners after there were no WMDs.

But once we were in Iraq, in control, occupying the country and policing for ther government we made the Iraqis create, the strategic importance of that oil has become obvious to pretty much everyone.

Making the Canada argument irrelevant.