So much for the Iraq war ending in 2003, try 2009

[color=darkred]So much for the Iraq war ending in 2003, try 2009… try NEVER[/color]

[color=red]On May 1, 2003 George W. Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, in a Lockheed S-3 Viking, where he gave a speech announcing the end of major combat operations in the Iraq war. Bush’s landing was criticized by opponents as an overly theatrical and expensive stunt. The official reasoning behind using a jet for the landing was the distance of the carrier from the shore. It has since been revealed the carrier was well within helicopter range of San Diego, and was turned around to hide the coast line from the TV cameras. Clearly visible in the background was a banner stating “Mission Accomplished”…[/color]
WASHINGTON (CNN) – In a wide-ranging interview Monday on CNN’s “Larry King Live,” Cheney cited the recent push by Iraqi forces to crack down on insurgent activity in Baghdad and reports that the most-wanted terrorist leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had been wounded. The vice president said he expected the war would end during President Bush’s second term, which ends in 2009.[/color]

[color=darkred]However, IMHO Cheney is a lying sack of sh*t. OK, so Cheney is lying about the war ending by 2009. Hmmm… does he mean it will end in 2007 or 2008? How about NEVER? Does NEVER work for you? Take a look at this: we’re building 14 permanent bases in Iraq:[/color]
In Baghdad yesterday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters the U.S. has no “exit strategy” for the country

Blah blah blah.

The people have spoken.

Shenme Niao -
Its customary to post the sources from which you copy and paste. :unamused:

By Rod Nordland

"Two years ago I went to Iraq as an unabashed believer in toppling Saddam Hussein. . .

What went wrong? A lot, but the biggest turning point was the Abu Ghraib scandal. Since April 2004 the liberation of Iraq has become a desperate exercise in damage control. . .

Living and working in Iraq, it’s hard not to succumb to despair. At last count America has pumped at least $7 billion into reconstruction projects, with little to show for it but the hostility of ordinary Iraqis . . . Most of the cash goes to U.S. contractors who spend much of it on personal security. Basic services like electricity, water and sewers still aren’t up to prewar levels. . . .

The most powerful army in human history can’t even protect a two-mile stretch of road. . . .

The four-square-mile Green Zone, the one place in Baghdad where foreigners are reasonably safe, could be a showcase of American values and abilities. Instead the American enclave is a trash-strewn wasteland of Mad Max-style fortifications. The traffic lights don’t work because no one has bothered to fix them. . . …

I can’t say how it will end. . . . There’s no real choice but to stay, probably for many years to come. The question isn’t “When will America pull out?”; it’s “How bad a mess can we afford to leave behind?” All I can say is this: last one out, please turn on the lights."

Bush’s Optimism On Iraq Debated

“I am pleased that in less than a year’s time, there’s a democratically elected government in Iraq, there are thousands of Iraq soldiers trained and better equipped to fight for their own country [and] that our strategy is very clear,” Bush said during a Rose Garden news conference Tuesday. Overall, he said, “I’m pleased with the progress.” Cheney offered an even more hopeful assessment during a CNN interview aired the night before, saying the insurgency was in its “last throes.”

Several Republicans questioned that evaluation. “I cannot say with any confidence that that is accurate,” said Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), a member of the House International Relations Committee. “I think it’s impossible to know how close we are to the insurgency being overcome.”

. . . “It’s dangerous when U.S. officials start to believe their own propaganda,” said David L. Phillips, a former State Department consultant who worked on Iraq planning . . . “I have no doubt that they genuinely think that Iraq is a smashing success and a milestone in their forward freedom strategy. But if you ask Iraqis, they have a different opinion.”

Surprise. Surprise. How many times to I have to repeat that I want to stay in Iraq for 60 years just like Japan, Germany and South Korea. Why would this be a bad thing? Do you think that a US presence would be bad for Iraq and regional stability? Do you think that we managed to use our presence in Korea, Japan or Germany to “exploit their resources to our own advantage?” Does the US now control any Iraqi oil? or the money generated from the sales of Iraqi oil?

Calm down. Stop hyperventilating and realize that this could be what the region needs. After all, the US has had a presence in Turkey and Greece since 1947 and guess what? Have either of the two bitter enemies ever gone to war during that time? Even when the red-hot issue of Cyprus came up? No. So calm down. Stop reading these conspiracy Web sites and realize that we will be in Iraq for a VERY LONG time and it will be a good thing.

The road to Denial, Iraq:

“Fred, wish you were here.”

Gosh. You know wars can be difficult. It does not make them worth fighting. We are still in Germany, Korea or Japan. Not worth it? Should have pulled out? Look what happened in Indochina when we did that. But that’s okay right? Communism was the wave of the future?

I really do wish though that we would stop pretending that Syria is an innocent bystander. Let’s clear it out and then all the northern and western regions will be relatively cleaned up and we can either concentrate on Iran or settle on containment.

52% of Americans believe today the war in Iraq has not contributed to the long-term security of the United States, “the first time a majority of Americans disagreed with the central notion President Bush has offered to build support for war.”

Nearly 60% believe today the war was not worth fighting.

More than 40% believe Iraq is becoming another Viet Nam.

Well Spook:

Those are disappointing figures but if we walk away from Iraq like we did in Vietnam, what do you think will happen?

I think that we are winning in Iraq but we could be doing more. We took out Fallujah and put the insurgents on the run. Why aren’t we doing more to take out a similar base of support for these insurgents and terrorists by taking out Syria. The answer is not to downgrade our activism in the region but to rachet it up. Most of these dictators now see the US as being bogged down in Iraq and unable to act against them because of loss of public support. Let’s challenge those assumptions and send a few raids across the border into Syria or let fly a few missiles so that the fragments fall into Syria. Two can play at that game. Maybe we should give Turkey a chance to become part of the team by doing what they did to end Syria’s support of the Kurdish insurgency. Perhaps, Turkey would like to mass a few troops north of the border? Why not?

The Never-Ending War . . .

"Two Washington Post reporters spent three days traveling with the Americans and the Iraqis, respectively. The unit was selected by the U.S. military . . . the soldiers of the Iraqi army’s Charlie Company began their mission with a ballad to ousted president Saddam Hussein. “We have lived in humiliation since you left,” one sang in Arabic, out of earshot of his U.S. counterparts. “We had hoped to spend our life with you.” . . .

The reconstruction of Iraq’s security forces is the prerequisite for an American withdrawal from Iraq. . . .

“We don’t want to take responsibility; we don’t want it,” said Amar Mana, 27, an Iraqi private . . . “Here, no way. The way the situation is, we wouldn’t be ready to take responsibility for a thousand years.” . . .

The men spoke of the insurgents with a hint of awe, saying the fighters were willing to die and outgunned them with rocket-propelled grenades and, more fearsome, car bombs. . . .

“Honestly, I don’t think people in America understand how touchy the situation really is right now,” McGovern said. . . . Asked when he thought the Iraqi soldiers might be ready to operate independently, McGovern said: "Honestly, there’s part of me that says never. . . .

“We like to refer to the Iraqi army as preschoolers with guns,” he said.

“As Arab men, they want for us to think that they’re just the same as us as soldiers, that they’re just as brave,” Cato said. “But they show cowardice. They’ll say to me, ‘I wasn’t afraid.’ But if you’re running, then you were obviously not just afraid, you were running away.” . . . When a U.S. quick reaction force arrived, the area was quiet and the Iraqi soldiers were huddled around their trucks. Four were missing; it was later learned that they had hailed taxis, gone home and changed into civilian clothes. One soldier, the company’s senior noncommissioned officer, refused to come out for several hours, saying he continued to be surrounded by insurgents.

After the incident, McGovern said he summoned an interpreter, asked him to translate the soldier’s words verbatim and “disgraced” the Iraqi soldiers.

“You are all cowards,” he began. “My soldiers are over here, away from our families for a year. We are willing to die for you to have freedom. You should be willing to die for your own freedom. If you continue to run away from the enemy, the enemy will continue to chase you. You will never win.”

McGovern asked the interpreter, Nabras Mohammed, if he had gone too far.

“Well, you shouldn’t have called them women, and you shouldn’t have called them” wimps, Mohammed told him. . . .

“Look at the homes of the Iraqis,” he said, a handkerchief concealing his face. “The people have been destroyed.”

By whom? he was asked.

“Them,” Omar said, pointing at the U.S. Humvees leading the patrol.

[color=blue]Making Vietnamization look easy.[/color]

One of the oft-repeated excuses people give for continuing the occupation of Iraq is that if we leave there might be a civil war. Well kiss that excuse goodbye:

The article describes a gulf forming between two wings of the insurgency, Jihadis and nationalist Iraqis. And guess what the rift is about? How to deal with the Americans.

Sounds like it’s our presence which has caused this civil war.

Perhaps it’s time all you Americans on this website who’re die-hard anti-war or now having buyers’ remourse took 3 minutes to write your Congresspeople and told them to support the Bi-partisan Homeward Bound Act to orderly withdraw from Iraq.

[Sponsors include Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Ron Paul (R-TX), Walter “Freedom Fries” Jones (R-NC)]

I will do no such thing. In fact, I just wrote to my congressmen to tell them to stand tough. Everyone focuses on the negatives. Hell, we had not even invaded the country and the horror stories ala Afghanistan began. Yes, we are in there with more troops than I expected to be at this point. It does not changes the fact that I completely agree with the mission. We are also in Kosovo and Bosnia still. Was supposed to be a quick engagement as well. Go figure.

Remember that Pakistan would not be talking to India, ending its support for militants, the Taliban and other radicals if the US had not gone into the area in a big way. Qadafi would not have given up his wmds, Syria would not be out of Lebanon, we would not be out of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait would not be giving women the right to vote among other nations in the region, the Algerian civil war would not be dying out, etc. etc.

We will win this. I have been convinced since Fallujah in November. (I had my greatest doubts when we left Fallujah in April previous). Fallujah represents the Tet offensive in this operation. It will be a hard fight for a while but it is all downhill (as in easier) from here. The government has been elected, power has been transferred, there will be a new constitution and there will be elections this December. The Sunnis have gotten the idea and I have a feeling that they will be participating to a far greater degree than they did in January. Wanna bet?

good work. maybe your leadership will inspire more people to contact their congresspeople.

I thought we already won it.

Also I think whether “we” win “this,” or not ,may depend on who “we” are (if we are neo-conservatives who want to hold on to power at all costs–you may well be right) and what “this” is (if it’s the global war on terror, that new CIA report doesn’t paint the rosiest of pictures).

[quote]According to the classified CIA report, the Iraq insurgency poses an international threat and may produce better trained Islamic terrorists than the 1980s Afghanistan war that gave rise to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.

oh-oh. bush’s crusade is a lost cause. christians have been reading their bible again.

[quote]New York, June 16, 2005

We? You have doubts about who we are? Well, do you support democracy or don’t you? Do you support human rights or don’t you? Do you agree that torture and abuse are wrong or don’t you? If so, then I think we can all agree who we are.

Second, the CIA also believed that Iraq had wmds. The CIA also missed 911. The CIA also has frequently been wrong about the development of wmds including Libya and Iran. So I guess you are quoting the CIA to show how wrong it is as usual?

[color=blue]Some people can fool themselves all the time but most people will eventually see through their political hokum: [/color]

June 23, 2005–Forty-nine percent (49%) of Americans say that President Bush is more responsible for starting the War with Iraq than Saddam Hussein. . .

In late 2002, months before the fighting began, most Americans thought that Hussein was the one provoking the War. Just one-in-four thought the President was doing the provoking at that time.

[quote=“fred smith”]We? You have doubts about who we are? Well, do you support democracy or don’t you? Do you support human rights or don’t you? Do you agree that torture and abuse are wrong or don’t you? If so, then I think we can all agree who we are.

Yes to all questions. Good, “we” agree that the Al Gonzalez and Donald Rumsfeld are fighting for “them.” Now the question, how do we protect ourselves from them? :astonished:

Not exactly. You’re right to suggest the CIA (like the entire Bush Administration, like Clinton’s,…) is not trustworthy. However, this doesn’t mean they are always wrong, and certainly not always 100% wrong. I posted it because assuming it’s wrong–I’d like to know how and why. Assuming it’s right (which does jive with common sense) I think it points to a fundemental reason why wars should be avoided at all costs: Unintended consequences are inevitable.

I can live with these statements. But remember that if Zarkawi were not fighting in Iraq would he be on vacation somewhere? I don’t think so. I think that it is no coincidence that the heat in Iraq is cooling the previously hot conflicts in Chechnya, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Algeria, Somalia and Yemen. All these buttfucks are headed for Iraq and at least we have an army to fight them. I wish them a speedy and pleasant martyrdom. Let’s face it. They need to be killed. We might as well all have them concentrated in one place to do it. But make no mistake. While this is greatly unfortunate for the Iraqis, it would be happening somewhere else. We need to whack them and if not in Iraq where? NY again? Tel Aviv? Rome? Madrid? Paris? Algiers? Beirut? Riyadh? Karachi? Hong Kong?

Well, that will get rid of the footsoldiers anyway, which is good. But the next generation of planners and vigilante cells are safely hidden away studying at Harvard. :slight_smile:

Well, that will get rid of the footsoldiers anyway, which is good. But the next generation of planners and vigilante cells are safely hidden away studying at Harvard. :slight_smile:[/quote]

Well said! :bravo: