Can rf.net agree on Iraq?

[NewYorkDragons80]

I have noticed that at the other political boards I post at, I am increasingly seeing the call for a total withdrawal from Iraq. "No," I say to myself. "Mainstream thinkers don't subscribe to such madness." What I want to know is, regardless of why you think we went to war, or the discovery of WMDs, etc, don't you think the US now bears the responsibility for seeing the operation in Iraq through and ensuring that a peaceful, pluralistic society emerges and to do anything less invites future attacks on the US? Shouldn't the US stay in Iraq until these goals are achieved? Please tell me we can agree on that, and restore my respect for liberalism.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

[HBox]

Yes, but we should share the burden, even if it means sharing control.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[furie]

We should stay until we've rebuilt Iraq and established order. After all, we're the ones who destablized it.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/asoh.jpg" height=100 width=300>

[Snoogans]

i say we suck all the Oil dry and then get out and level the whole area....
This george w guy may have beat me to that idea

http://wnewsgirl.homestead.com/files/Snoogans.jpg
Silent Bob you one rude motherfucker, she like to go down on you, suck you. line up 2 other guys and make like a circus seal


eww you fuckin faggots, i hate guys, i LOOOOVE WOMEN!

[shamus mcfitzy]

Can rf.net agree on Iraq?


no



Please tell me we can agree on that, and restore my respect for liberalism.


sorry, no one wants your respect jerky :)

[NewYorkDragons80]

Yes, but we should share the burden, even if it means sharing control.
Fair enough. On one hand, Turkish troops are a good thing. However, when do we let the Council start deciding on Iraqi affairs?

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

[42nd-delay]

On one hand, Turkish troops are a good thing.


Well, I don't agree with this - I think they're just trying to gain influence and power in the country. But then, I'm half-Armenian, so i'm a little biased.

Overall, I think pulling out of Iraq would be disasterous if we hadn't done enough work towards making it a stable, peaceful, democratic and prosperous place. But we can't do it without a bigger commitment. We're undertaking huge nation building projects yet trying to do them on the cheap. We can't keep cutting taxes, sending in the minimum of troops, act cavilier to te rest of the world and expect to be able to do this right. If we want to have a peaceful future, we may have to sacrifice for a while.

------------------------------
"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

This message was edited by 42nd-delay on 10-8-03 @ 10:39 PM

[Reephdweller]

i say we suck all the Oil dry and then get out and level the whole area....


i feel the same way exactly

<center><IMG SRC="http://www.chaoticconcepts.com/randomizer/random.php?uid=3"></center>
<center>HORDE KING FOREVER!!!
ORACLE NEVER!!! </center>

<font size="1" color="red">
<marquee behavior=alternate bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Right now you could care less about me...
but soon enough you will care, by the time Im done</marquee> </font>

[Yerdaddy]

don't you think the US now bears the responsibility for seeing the operation in Iraq through and ensuring that a peaceful, pluralistic society emerges and to do anything less invites future attacks on the US?
Yes. The only disagreements I've had with the administration since the war started has been over the process, their priorities, and their misjudgements on what should have been expected in the post-conflict period.

The groups calling for full withdrawal of the US from Iraq are fringe groups, and the groups I work with have been fighting with those people to reconsider that message. My biggest fear is that, over time, pressure to pull out will come from broader segments of the population, and if Bush loses the next election the strongest pressure will come from the right, and will succeed.

when do we let the Council start deciding on Iraqi affairs?
Considering these are mostly hand-picked leaders of exile groups with little internal popular support, you can't turn over full authority until after a constitution is drafted and voted on by all Iraqis. As it is, since Paul Bremmer replaced Jay Garner, the Iraqi Leadership council has been expanded and is involved in the decision-making on most areas of reconstruction.


<IMG SRC="http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/siggywo4.jpg">

[NewYorkDragons80]

Turkish troops are a good thing in the sense that it is less of a burden on the Americans. Obviously, these are the same people that ruled Iraq until WWI, but the idea of internationalizing Iraq is good.

And Yerdaddy, my post was in reference to the Council voting against the presence of Turkish troops.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

This message was edited by NewYorkDragons80 on 10-8-03 @ 10:59 PM

[Yerdaddy]

And Yerdaddy, my post was in reference to the Council voting against the presence of Turkish troops.

Which shouldn't be surprising since the leaders of the two main Kurdish groups are members of the Leadership Council and with rotating seats in the Presidency. Given Turkey's history of repression of the Kurds and ruling over Iraq, and it's interests as a neighbor of Iraq I think Turkish troops are a bad idea. There is a need for other troops in Iraq, but Turkey would be one of my last choices for troops. There are other ways that they can support the process, and should do so to build the trust of their new neighbors. The administration is just so desperate for foreign troops that they may take the Turks.

<IMG SRC="http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/siggywo4.jpg">

[monsterone]

i've always believed that invading iraq ws a means of getting a foothold in the mid-east. you'd be niave to think that the government thinks we are there to help the iraqis.

we are there for our own interests and the need to take down a peg anyone who thinks they can share/ take the lone seat of the world power.

we'll stay there for a while- if there is an attack on the us, we have troops on call, who can move swiftly and have a strong military backing

<center><IMG SRC="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=monsterone01"></center>

<marquee behavior=alternate scrolldelay=30> i have a perrynoid song about me, how 'bout you?</Marquee>

[NewYorkDragons80]

That's true, Yerdaddy, but I think the administration is eager to see Muslim troops in Iraq. For what it's worth, South Korean troops would probably be my #1 choice for likely peacekeepers. The Iraqis would have no strong opinions towards them one way or the other, and they are some of the best soldiers on the planet. Jordanian troops would be the most agreeable of any foreign soldier, but I don't see that happening.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

This message was edited by NewYorkDragons80 on 10-9-03 @ 12:20 PM

[Mike Teacher]

i've always believed that invading iraq was a means of getting football in the mid-east.


Jesus! I read your first sentence as I have 'quoted' it above. Took me two times before my mind saw 'foothold' instead of football.

I gotta get my mind off of sports, and I'm not even a big Fan!



<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/sigpic">

[Recyclerz]

Since when are we as a messageboard being all polite & such? It makes a nice change. :)

My $0.02: I agree that we're committed to at least try to live up to our rhetoric (whether we believe it or not). I believe that to cut and run now will encourage other regional powers (in SW Asia and elsewhere) to start challenging US interests because they think they can get away with it. And that will make the world a more dangerous place.

However, I think we should give the "pull out now" crowd a fair listen rather than just dismiss them as crybabies. Suppose we do commit to do what it takes (from our POV) to make Iraq a pluralistic, pro-western, human rights conscious society. (I'm purposely not saying a "democracy".) Where is the evidence that that is what the Iraqis even want? Wolfowitz had the vision that Iraq was a secular well-educated, (potentially) rich society that was being run by a monster and that once we removed the dictator & posse, the people would naturally gravitate to and see the US as a benevolent big brother. Well, that's what Chalabi sold him. The facts on the ground aren't looking so clear now.
It seems at least as likely (as Wolfowitz' scenario) that the Iraqis are really still in a tribal, medievel state of development with a narrow "Westernized elite" class that will get swallowed up in a real democracy. And if that is the soil in which we are trying to grow our pot plants of democracy, the harvest could be pretty thin and we may go buzzless. And how much money and, more importantly, how many American soldiers' lives are we willing to spend chasing that illusion?

With the real threat of WMD in the equation, the cost/benefit of this war was different.

[b]Partisian alert: [b] If Bush & Co. were lying to us they should be thrown out (and even if they weren't lying their judgement is questionable). I really think our (the Country's) best route out of this mess is to get a new president in '04, who can go to the world community with "clean hands" and really internationalize the rebuilding which will reduce our exposure (and the profits of Halliburton and Bechtel). There still will be no guarantees of success. But I think its our best course.

There ain't no asylum here.
King Solomon, he never lived 'round here.

[TheMojoPin]

Yes, we need to stay.

Yes, we need outside help.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[HBox]

It just needs to be said. To completely pull out and abandon Iraq now, with Saddam at large, with terrorists all over the place, with the infrastructure destroyed and only partially rebuilt, if that, would be absolutely insanely stupid.

I don't care if we create a democracy or a Pax Americana. Whatever type of government that creates stability in that country and leaves them not hating us, and is short of a dictator, is fine with me.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[A.J.]

'Well, You Try To Reconstruct Iraq' (http://www.theonion.com/3942/news1.html)

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">
A Skidmark production.

Red Sox Nation

[high fly]

Guess this is as good a place as any to remind y'all of my "California-sized West Bank of our very own" prediction.

Think things are tough now? Wait till troops leave the Army in droves when their enlistments are up and they can't replace them.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[A.J.]

Actually, all the services have very good recruitment levels so replacing those that leave shouldn't be too difficult.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">
A Skidmark production.

Red Sox Nation

[FUNKMAN]

i think we need to understand that the 'homicide bombings' and attacks on the police amd military will never go away. it's not like the US where most people have a fear or dying or being put in jail.
there are most likely many wealthy people living throughout the arab countries that just 'hate' the US whether their thinking is justified or not.

Iraq needs to build a 'very strong' infrastructure, especially Military, Police Force, and Justice System, and probably most important of all, an Intelligence system.

if/when Iraq becomes a Democratic society, most certainly it will become the next Israel. Israel hasn't figured out how to stop the bombings and how long has it been.

So, once Iraq builds a 'ver strong' infrastructure, then us being there serves no purpose.



<img src="http://www.grandfunkrailroad.com/covers/ontime100.jpg">