A Progressive Exit Strategy
A Progressive Exit Strategy
1,934 U.S. soldiers have died and nearly 15,000 have been wounded in Iraq. Our military is stretched to the breaking point. Iraq has become a new haven for global terrorists, and now sits on the brink of sectarian civil war. And for this, American taxpayers will soon have paid three hundred billion dollars — $300,000,000,000.00.
Nevertheless, no alternatives to the President’s discredited “stay the course” strategy have emerged in government or among foreign policy elites. Clearly, the status quo is untenable. But implementing an immediate pull-out is neither strategically sound nor logistically possible.
Today, the Center for American Progress released a progressive exit strategy for Iraq. It will ensure the strength of our armed forces, increase chances of stability in Iraq, and culminate with the redeployment of virtually all U.S. forces out of Iraq by 2007. Some details on the plan follow:
Strategic Redeployment
Phase 1 (2006):
– Shift in Iraq Forces: Drawdown 80,000 troops, leaving 60,000 US troops in Iraq by December 31, 2006.
– Redeployment of Troops Within Iraq: US troops would immediately and completely redeploy from urban areas, with Iraqi police, troops, and militias, like the Kurdish pesh merga, taking responsibility for security in these areas. The top U.S. priorities would be continuing to train Iraqi security forces, tightening Iraq’s border, and tracking down insurgents with small Special Forces units.
– Redeployment of Troops Outside Iraq: All Guard and Reserve troops would be demobilized and would immediately return to the United States; another 20,000 would be shifted to Afghanistan; the remaining 14,000 would be stationed in Kuwait, enabling the Army and Marines to return to the time-tested policy of allowing a soldier or Marine to spend at least two months at home for every month deployed abroad.
Phase 2 (2007):
– Shift in Iraq Forces: Drawdown 59,000 troops, leaving 1,000 U.S. troops in Iraq by December 31, 2007
– Redeployment of Troops Within Iraq: The remaining forces would consist of a small Marine contingent to protect the US embassy, a small group of military advisors to the Iraqi Government, and counterterrorist units that work closely with Iraqi security forces.
The report also calls for a regional diplomatic initiative aimed at securing Iraq’s borders and taking down terrorist networks; smarter support for reconstruction and political development in Iraq; and a new global communications campaign to clarify US intentions in Iraq and the region, including an unambiguous announcement by President Bush that the United States will not build permanent military bases in Iraq.
Read the full report HERE.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
And just leave those 14 bases and the Iraqi oilfields empty? Methinks the Administration has other plans...
September 30th, 2005 at 5:03 pmIt's beginning to look like Iraq will become the 51st State in the Union... if George has his way. :-(
September 30th, 2005 at 5:07 pmI'm for immediate withdrawal and thats all I support.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:13 pmThe war in Iraq is illegal and to continue occupying Iraq is a crime. I will support the commission of a crime.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:14 pmIn other words: cut and run more slowly. The goals are:
It will ensure the strength of our armed forces, increase chances of stability in Iraq, and culminate with the redeployment of virtually all U.S. forces out of Iraq by 2007.
You're going to hit the ones on the edges, but the one in the middle will miss by a mile (and I'm glad I won't be one of the 1,000 military personnel left at the end).
September 30th, 2005 at 5:14 pmoops, "will NOT support"
September 30th, 2005 at 5:14 pmI thought we won this war already.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:18 pmDon't forget, nixon pulled that 'withdraw'...just before election time. I smell a rat. 2008?
September 30th, 2005 at 5:27 pm"Bring them home now with a quick,reasonable timetable."
starting now...ought to do it. Part 2,impeach bush and all the rest.
UGH, This is not "cut and run" more slowly. This is an untenable, unsupportable occupation/war and must be ended as soon as possible. It was an enormous blunder by Bush & Co. with horrific consequences. We must admit that fact, oust the perpetrators, show the world that we, the public, do not stand with Bush, and will do our best over a short period to diminish our role and return the country to its citizens. We have made too many enemies, created too many terrorists, and endangered ourselves -- we have to end it, and the sooner the better, with reason and a plan.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:30 pmBush & CO. mock the Democrats for not having a plan when they, themselves, have not had a plan from the conception of this cockamamie and dangerous adventure. The Democrats ARE thinking of solutions and those solutions will not please everyone, but it demonstrates a sincere effort to change the dynamics of this debacle. It is a far better plan than anything coming from the White House and it will show the world that we recognize our (Bush's) errors and are making an honest effort to change. Not only changes in Iraq, but change in this White House regime. It is the ONLY way we can regain any measure of respectablilty and redcibility in the world.
Briefly - off topic -- I just saw a file film on CNN played while Miller was speaking to the press earlier. The file film showed a gaggle of criminals all standing together: Cheney, Rove, Libby, Bartlett, and the woman litigator (whose name escapes me) who Bush is thinking of nominating to the SCOTUS.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:35 pmThese guys and gal all should be behind bars.
I'm not sure that I agree with the author's position that our presence in urban areas is probably increasing the size of the insurgency. I think it is possibly true that our presence there is increasing the willingness of certain insurgents to commit suicidal attacks, but I think that a power vacuum would result in warlordism and regional gangs of thugs.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:40 pmMarie: This is not “cut and run†more slowly.
Yes it is. Is it better than "cut and run"? Maybe. Is it worse than "cut and run"? Maybe.
Is "cut and run" bad? It depends. For the future of Iraq? Most likely. For the Middle East? Likely. For the United States? Likely.
Is "cut and run" the worst policy? Probably not. Is "stay the course" the worst policy? Probably not.
I don't have any solutions, but I don't like the "redeployment" strategy as it smacks of, "what can we sell the American people today?" Which sounds like the Bush administration.
September 30th, 2005 at 5:44 pmAll your bases belong to us!
September 30th, 2005 at 5:57 pmFrom the Washington Post:
"The number of Iraqi army battalions that can fight insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped from three to one, top U.S. generals told Congress yesterday, adding that the security situation in Iraq is too uncertain to predict large-scale American troop withdrawals anytime soon...Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who oversees U.S. forces in Iraq, said there are fewer Iraqi battalions at "Level 1" readiness than there were a few months ago."
In the U.S. military, a "battalion" consists of 300-1,000 soldiers. So, after spending several hundred billion dollars there, at best we have 1,000 Iraqi soldiers that can competently defend the place. I did a quick, random Google search and found that lil' New Zealand has over 9,000 regulars in their Armed Forces, presumably most of them competent and reasonably well-equipped and trained. How about that postage stamp named "Luxembourg?" Turns out they have 430 full-time soldiers. So hey, let's celebrate! With just $300 billion, we've created a professional Iraqi fighting force that's TWICE the size of Luxembourg's! I feel much better knowing that, should Luxembourg invaded Iraq, they should be able to properly defend themselves. But if the 9,000 Kiwis dare go on a drunken invasion of Baghdad, we're in trouble!
September 30th, 2005 at 5:59 pmDems are afraid of demanding a pullout only to be hit with an attack. That would destroy the dems forever. This might be the only plan, though I disagree.
September 30th, 2005 at 6:06 pmBecause of George W. Bush we have no good options in Iraq. This plan sounds like a reasonable attempt to make the best of a bad situation.
September 30th, 2005 at 6:14 pmYou know what's messed up?
These Republicans who still continue to support the war, are, in the same breath, refusing to pay higher taxes.
How are they actually willing to spend human life, but NOT willing to spend a few extra dollars getting this country out of the mess we are in?
It's Bush's entire platform! He refuses to raise any taxes, AND asks for people to be patriotic and support the troops or sign up to fight! It's completely ridiculous.
We've seen a lot of people give money and homes and for food and water to those in the Gulf, so why can't they get serious about it, and agree to pay higher taxes to help EVERYONE?
September 30th, 2005 at 6:16 pm#10 - Harriet Miers?
September 30th, 2005 at 6:25 pmPart of me doesn't like saying this, but the Center's plan for Iraq is no more progressive than its seriously misguided faux progressive plan for education. Just rewatered centrist conservatism wrapped in sad rags of 'praying to stay digested' notions of doing something. It would cost us a whole lot less to buy Iraqi oil from whatever warlords or militia shias or even the most likely Iranian mullahs who have control over the Iraq government now, than the lives and funding of endless war is costing. Getting out is like dying, in the sense that we all grow up learning to ignore the only thing that is going to happen to us for sure in your lives--that we die. We are going to get out of Iraq, and since we are going to get out, the sooner we do so, the more time we all have to move on with taking care of our own nation and improving its economic capacity to function in the world.
September 30th, 2005 at 7:05 pmImmediate withdrawal?
Support the commission of a crime and stay?
Support a war that Bushie has no intention of winning? (Remember, this war is about oil not terrorism or democracy)
Immediate withdrawal.
September 30th, 2005 at 7:21 pmI agree with Spyder, only I want our troops home now, yesterday would of been better, the day after Sadam was found would of been good, best of all if we had not allowed this Bush mess to happen at all and kept our sights on Osama. Now we have people to impeach and our own country and Iraq in shambles. Our debt is held by china and half the country have their minds on their preachers advice,cued by a facist dictator or regime...It is all to unbelievable for me to manage. Guess I find it hard to believe that so many americans in such a short time are so lazy they want to be ruled and manipulated into giving up their rights and the progress many of us worked so hard to get. Everything is being polluted by this bunch and so many just act like it's just another day. Fill the hummer up with gas and go. Gees. We are in the fifth year of this mess, don't think we will be in very good shape if this bunch stays in untill 2008, especialy if china or some other country askes us to bend over....Blessings
September 30th, 2005 at 7:32 pmThere's a big problem with this plan: progressives suggested it. Because of this, Repubs will resist it instinctively.
September 30th, 2005 at 7:42 pmI am a Vietnam era vet. Has anybody asked the hard question about the 15,000 wounded?
Since the use of the huge IEDs are causing most of the casualties just how many of those people are brain dead and will never recover? How many are in a permanent state of a coma?
With these huge explosions the casualties can only fall into a few categories; Lost of limbs, lost of life, or concussion (brain dead).
If the administration is hiding the fact that we have a large number of military personnel casualties that are in fact brain dead, then another question has to be asked. What of the family, are they in a no-man’s land of legal definitions and other people’s ideas of keeping them alive like Terri Schiavo? Are those family receiving the death benefits that they should be receiving?
September 30th, 2005 at 7:48 pmSolution:
1. Stop being a consumer.
2. Stop paying your taxes.
3. Steal from the 1% wealthy.
4. Stop being cowards.
Return America to its poetical nature.
September 30th, 2005 at 7:56 pm#18 Thank you for finding my lost memory!
September 30th, 2005 at 8:00 pmEasy Rider, the very sad fact is that our wounded vets today are extremely wounded!! Lack of proper equipment and training - within the last week there was another report of ineffective Kevlar vests, and improperly armored vehicles still in common usage; reports of worn out boots, and other ordinary equipment and supplies unavailable; many families are still forced into purchasing items for their soldiers. These are life-altering wounds suffered by young people and it is more than disgusting to think that our Defense Department is doing the bare minimum for the vets and their families. Red tape, stalling, denials, obstacles abound in the pursuit of care, reimbursement, support for many of these wounded and their families.
September 30th, 2005 at 8:16 pmI am shocked that the VFWs continue to support Bush.
What is in the future?
We must be part of the change we wish to see, how do we do that.? Stop the war and Impeach..Blessings
September 30th, 2005 at 8:26 pmMarie,
I wonder how all of those fake patriots feel about sending the troops into harms way without armor or equipment while Exxon and company get an 8.1 billion tax break.
Clearly the priority of this administration is pocket lining for their friends and NOT supporting the troops. The only time the line of 'you don't support the troops' even occurs on the right wing, is when you point out to them that THEY aren't supporting the troops through their inept policies! One would hope the reichwingers would be somehow human in their responses in light of these facts - but instead they are cold, calculating and heartless. All responses are selfish, self serving and juvenile. We clearly have an inept generation of republican shitheads who know nothing of humanity or american ideals...
September 30th, 2005 at 8:53 pmNo matter what we do it hasen't worked so far. I have written so many letter and responded to so many e-mails to stop this madness I am dazed. Give me some more ideas, I'll do it. March when, where, stop commerce, no buy, boycott, anything. You guy's start naming some stuff to do and I'll join in. My local paper the Everett Harold is worthless, only a few short quips get in the editors page and usualy when some out of state columnest is wrighting his right wing junk. I'm at witts end. We need to stop the killing and bring the troops home now...Blessings
September 30th, 2005 at 9:04 pmThe VFW has a basic problem. They believe that the GOP represents the party of Lincoln, actually, they more closely represent the party of Jeff Davis. The transition started when LBJ supported civil rights. That is when the Old South wnet GOP via the Dixiecrat route. Now all the rednecks and KKK types are Repugnants. Unfortunately, the pseudo Christan big oil MBAs of the oil industry have convinced these ignorant louts into believing that it is to their benefit to pay three dollars for a gallon of gas and more than that for a pint and a half of bottled tap water.
September 30th, 2005 at 9:13 pm#28 Sharon, I think all that we do has been effective. Its been slow and frustrating but we are having a good week so far.
DeLay Indictment
Frist SEC Investigation
Judith Miller testimony
Gov. Taft (Ohio R) pleads no contest to bribery charge
Kentucky Gov. (R) approval rating at 32%
Former Gov. George Ryan (Illinois R) corruption trial begins
Not a bad week if I say so myself. Next week should be even better.
September 30th, 2005 at 9:44 pmMike Brown whining on National Television
September 30th, 2005 at 9:50 pmNo matter what we do it hasen’t worked so far. I have written so many letter and responded to so many e-mails to stop this madness I am dazed. Give me some more ideas, I’ll do it.
comment by Sharon Cocks
How about a nude beach party protest? I'm all over it!
September 30th, 2005 at 9:53 pm#28 Sharon, I think all that we do has been effective. Its been slow and frustrating but we are having a good week so far.
comment by Susan
A good week is you getting laid. You might want to talk to Ryan "Really, I'm not a homo" Neat. You might get lucky. Please bring your latest STD test reports. Ryan is real careful when it comes to orifices.
September 30th, 2005 at 9:55 pmYou don't seem like the type I-Right-I. I figure you for the "don't have any type of fun" type.
September 30th, 2005 at 9:57 pmBy his own definition, Wrong Eye probably hasn't had a good week in years.
Everybody knows liberals have more and better sex than conservatives do. (In fact, they themselves go out of their way to point out what libertines we are. It's the main reason they hated JFK and Clinton.)
Can't have this one both ways, guy. Either we're out of control sex maniacs, or not. Make up your mind.
(BTW, it's only Friday, but I've "had a good week" ten times over already. Not bad for an old married lady pushing 50.)
September 30th, 2005 at 10:19 pmYou go girl!
September 30th, 2005 at 10:23 pmMrFixation prefers to talk sex than politics, clearly his interests are micro and not macro - just as his brain is...
As I previously stated, and it still holds true..
I wonder how all of those fake patriots feel about sending the troops into harms way without armor or equipment while Exxon and company get an 8.1 billion tax break.
Clearly the priority of this administration is pocket lining for their friends and NOT supporting the troops. The only time the line of ‘you don’t support the troops’ even occurs on the right wing, is when you point out to them that THEY aren’t supporting the troops through their inept policies! One would hope the reichwingers would be somehow human in their responses in light of these facts - but instead they are cold, calculating and heartless. All responses are selfish, self serving and juvenile. We clearly have an inept generation of republican shitheads who know nothing of humanity or american ideals…
September 30th, 2005 at 10:54 pmTo quote marblex,
When you have the law on your side, you argue the law.
When you have the facts on your side, you argue the facts.
When you have neither, you attack your opponent.
September 30th, 2005 at 11:03 pmHow about financially compensating all Iraqi citizens that lost property and family members?
September 30th, 2005 at 11:52 pmRumsfeld, and Myers, have continually said that there are three components to our involvement in Iraq: Economic, political, and military, and that we need progress on all three fronts in order to succeed, which they define as a democratic government able to defend itself. Now we have a situation where there has been considerable progress on the political front, with an elected government and a constitution, or at least a government (our own Constitution doesn't mean a hell of a lot). The main problems are resistance to our military occupation and the non-involvement of Iraqis in their own economic rebuilding. So this proposed exit strategy doesn't address the problems: what we need is an exit, and not an exit strategy, that will allow the Iraqis to use their new democratic government to progress economically without the military problems that our aggressive, over-reaching, detaining, torturing, door-busting, killing military brings to any country that they go to. I mean, if the Iraqi army were in Scarsdale, killing and detaining, would the residents hide under their beds, or would the resist? So get out. Cut-and-run. Whatever you want to call it.
It is not militarily practical to pull our military units out of the main areas of conflict, the urban areas, and reposition them on the borders. This is silly.
As for Afghanistan, Hello, why reinforce failure? Sending National Guard troops, weekend warriors, to this sinkhole of depravity and backwardness and drug production is an idea which should never see the light of day.
Finally, has CAP involved the Iraqis and the Afghanis in this grand plan? Well, have they? The majority of the Iraqis, and a majority of their government (except Jaafari, whom we've bought) and their business-people, and their leading unionists (which Bremer outlawed), want us out. The Afghanis, for their part, don't want us killing any more Afghanis (small wonder).
So, suck it up, guys, back to the old drawing boards, this plan doesn't cut it, even Professor Juan Cole has forsaken his phased plan for a get-out-now policy, and please, together with the people most affected by our grand empirical plans, come up with something more sensible.
September 30th, 2005 at 11:59 pmJudith Miller spends 85 days in jail for not revealing her source.
George Bush bombs Iraq into submission, kills one hundred thousand Iraqis and flys around in Air Force One with 47 thousand gallons of jet fuel.
"Living is a crock of shit." - Kurt Vonnegut
He's got that right.
I wouldn't want to be George Bush when St. Peter greets him at the Pearly Gates. He's in for a big surprise.
October 1st, 2005 at 12:08 amI'm gonna be a spammer and repeat my post above since the point is mind boggling, but I'll reduce it to readable, bite-size morsels:
1. We've spend close to $300B in Iraq.
October 1st, 2005 at 12:34 am2. For all that we have ONE Iraqi army battalion that can operate without U.S. help. That's 300-1,000 troops!
3. Luxembourg's army has 430 full-time troops.
4. So, for a third of a trillion dollars, we now have an Iraqi army that hypothetically could take on Luxembourg.
5. That makes me very, very sad...
Are you completely nuts? 2007? The current US regime has no plans whatsoever to leave Iraq and never did. So why are you giving these crooks two more years?
October 1st, 2005 at 2:45 amBush has no plan to EVER leave former-Iraq.
"There is no more Iraq. There will be three territories." -- Henry F* Kissinger, early 2004
$300 Billion for permanent bases over the oil of Iraq and the needed Pipelinestan for west Asian oil -- not very much money.
Nevermind the genocide, and the corporate destruction of the American military to achieve this illegal, immoral goal.
October 1st, 2005 at 5:12 amI realize that posting has become just one more futile act in a game that has been fixed even before it was started.But what the H- In order to exit "immediately" involves at least 6 months minimum-- that is MINIMUM!- so let us be real. Cut and run is a distinctly a gop talking point! A shared concern followed by a shared action plan is all that is possible. Every single scrap of "non- permanent" sites will have to be removed and the end game will have to include to removal of any vestige of US presence. Yup- harsh but true. This will not be a loss but will reflect a true concern for humankind. Not a fraudulent posturing designed to once again coverup a corporate takeover of a regions sole method of funding their growth as a country or region.Given the fact that our country possesses the greatest capacity for assisting in the peacfull development of safe and productive peoples, I remain puzzled as to why we have chosen to attempt the domination of the world. Historically it has never proved successful. NEVER! Yet, the swagger and bravado that always seems to show up when we have chosen the wrong way to achieve our pooly concieved goals leads me to believe that as I said at the start of this rant- Futility appears to be the operative word.
October 1st, 2005 at 7:02 amPlease consider this scenario; your walking down this road with other people and you come on a section of the road which is flooded, now you decide against your fellow walkers' wishes to continue on and cross the flooded section of highway. Slowly but surely you go forward until the water has risen to your neck. At this point in the story do you think it might be wise to have our walker (The President ) turnaround and come back (cut and Run ) or do you advise the walker to continue on to certain destruction ????????????????????
October 1st, 2005 at 11:48 am(BTW, it’s only Friday, but I’ve “had a good week†ten times over already. Not bad for an old married lady pushing 50.)
Comment by Gone At Last
Porno doesn't count.
October 1st, 2005 at 12:18 pmThis so-called "exit strategy" is nothing more than a blueprint for cowardice. It would only encourage the terrorists and would invite increased attacks on Americans in Iraq and around the world. It should be read aloud by Eric Idle to the accompaniment of "The Ballad of Sir Robin," from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail."
October 1st, 2005 at 12:34 pmBSR, You think it is cowardice; I think it is false bravado and foolhardy to not recognize failure.
October 1st, 2005 at 12:45 pmYes BSR, the terrorists and insurgents aren't encouraged right at this moment by the ongoing US occupation that invigorates their recruitment ability. Stick your head back up your ass, we'll call you when we need you.
October 1st, 2005 at 1:19 pmThe true coward in life, is the person who cannot admit they are wrong, and that they are a failure. That would be YOU trolls...
October 1st, 2005 at 1:25 pmLet's see what the US generals in charge think, shall we?
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-usiraq1oct01,0,7766978.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Oh and what do think Bali has to say about that good old "We'll fight them there so we don't fight them here" strategy?
October 1st, 2005 at 1:35 pmBali: "Thanks George Walker Bush!"
October 1st, 2005 at 1:49 pmWhen you consider the facts, things become much more clear.
The terrorists were originally trained by Reagan and BushI (in fact under the direction of Cheney and Rumsfeld) for the purposes of disrupting a military (russians) and causing them military and economic harm.
The technique was chosen by OUR government, because it is effective, and the more you 'fight' it, the more it costs your military - as the russians discovered.
The technique produces more home grown terrorists than good guys as we witnessed in Afghanistan against the russians.
Only a fool would keep fighting using the military as the method - as the russians did for years, and as we continue to do.
Why are these morons doing the SAME things the russians do? Because they thought the problem was that the russians didn't have good enough equipment or soldiers, they didn't realize HOW effective planting terrorism is. This is why progressives would never have done something as stupid as found AlQueda - yet that's EXACTLY what our treasonous republicans did! They founding the same organization that attacked us - they even hand picked Osama to lead them!
You're a stupid dupe BSR, and all your irrational nationism does is put our nation at risk. We invaded another country without cause, we killed 100,000 of its people, we destroyed its infrastructure, we BROUGHT the terrorists into that country - and you wonder why some of those people might turn to the terrorists instead of us? Maybe its because we look the arrogant and brutal roman empire - and they want no part of your hypocrisy!
October 1st, 2005 at 1:58 pmRight on Ryan!
Facts are good.
October 1st, 2005 at 2:23 pmRyan, Susan -- you hate Bush, and that's a good thing, so do I, because your argument is correct, but we must be factual and realize that Bush built a living hell on a foundation laid, not only by Repubs, but Dems. There was the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act signed by Clinton, and, going back to Carter, the training and supporting of Osama and the Taliban.
This is a 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzenski, President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor
***
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action [the U.S. government’s furnishing of weapons to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, which brought the Soviets into Afghanistan]. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
***********
October 1st, 2005 at 4:39 pmSo now the piper must be paid, because those Moslems are really stirred up.
From Michael Schwartz on why IMMEDIATE withdrawl makes sense.
1. The U.S. military is already killing more civilian Iraqis than would likely die in any threatened civil war;
2. The U.S. presence is actually aggravating terrorist (Iraqi-on-Iraqi) violence, not suppressing it;
3. Much of the current terrorist violence would be likely to subside if the U.S. left;
4. The longer the U.S. stays, the more likely that scenarios involving an authentic civil war will prove accurate.
http://tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=23549
October 1st, 2005 at 6:04 pmPorno doesn’t count.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — October 1, 2005 @
You poor bastard. You must never have a good day.
October 1st, 2005 at 7:48 pmThere goes Ryan again, telling complete...well, lies. He thinks terrorism began with Reagan. Ryan, you must have benn a protozoa in your momma's womb in the 70's. Would you say that Carter's policies correctly dealt with terrorism? Were his policies and actions effective?
October 1st, 2005 at 8:01 pmMORE ON CUT-N-RUN
Excerpts from Professor Juan Cole piece:
The first reason to get the ground troops out now is that they are being fatally brutalized by their own treatment of Iraqi prisoners.
The second reason is that the ground troops are not accomplishing the mission given them, and are making things worse rather than better.
Basically, if all the US military in Iraq is capable of is operations like Fallujah and Tal Afar, then they really need to get out of the country quick before they drive the whole country, and the region, into chaos.
Even as they are chasing after shadows in dusty border towns, the US military is allowing much of Baghdad to fall into the hands of the guerrillas.
And that is why we have to get the ground troops out. Counter-insurgency has to have both a military and a political track. Even as the enemy is being pressed, you have to reach out to the civilian leadership and try to draw them into a truce.
Things in the Sunni Arab areas are getting worse, not better.
I conclude that the presence of the US ground troops is making things worse, not better.
Let's get them out, now, before they destroy any more cities, create any more hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons, provoke any more ethnic hatreds by installing Shiite police in Fallujah or Kurdish troops in Turkmen Tal Afar. They are sowing a vast whirlwind, a desert sandstorm of Martian proportions, which future generations of Americans and Iraqis will reap.
The ground troops must come out. Now. For the good of Iraq. For the good of America.
October 1st, 2005 at 8:02 pmAhhhhh.... the military geniuses of the "regressive left". Here's a message you may want to transmit:
October 1st, 2005 at 8:41 pm*** ALL radical Islamofascist: wait until the US gradually cuts and runs so you may pursue killing all Moslems left in your path of "diversity". Viet Nam and Cambodia are EXCELLENT examples of the left's complete inability to understand the viciousness of totalitarianism.
You make a good case, Don. And I have read Juan Cole.
October 1st, 2005 at 9:13 pmIT wouldn't be cut and run though, that is GOP talk. It will take months, hoever, even if we started now, to get the troops out. The CAP plan has some merit. Can the same be accomplished in less than one year?
Marie: Cut-n-run has a certain flair, and it drives all the chicken hawks nuts, so I like it. Stan Goff says we could do it in a month; I think six months is very realistic. If there's a will, there's a way. That would give the true patriots like mighty aphrodite enough time to enlist with Blackwater Security, or just go on his own to fight them Islamofascists, like the totalitarianism in Cambodia and Vietnam. And while he and the other chickenhawks are over there, we'll have a better chance of reversing our own trend to fascism here in the US of A. We also have to start the healing process: many of our people who have survived the Iraq nightmare will be tormented forever by physical and mental injuries, including many with PTSD, and we have to help them. Meanwhile, with or without m.a., the Iraqi people would be released from our military occupation and able to fashion their own future free of our criminal detention, harassment, torture, killing and destruction. It is a criminal act to drag this out. We all know, or should know, that it's wrong. We've done the cannon fodder bit, so enough already. We won, Saddam's gone, let's celebrate V-I day and end the damn thing.
October 2nd, 2005 at 12:32 am"Viet Nam and Cambodia are EXCELLENT examples of the left’s complete inability to understand the viciousness of totalitarianism."
Really? I always thought they were excellent examples of the RIGHT wing aspects of governments to become totalitarian - and why it's important to support liberal and progressive democracies world wide. The fact that you clearly know nothing of the lessons of vietnam, explains why your party keeps repeating their mistakes!
October 2nd, 2005 at 12:47 amVery good posts every one, except the trolls and tidy didie who ever he/she is.........Blessings
October 2nd, 2005 at 2:25 amRecent testimon from General George Casey, which reinforces Professor Cole's statement that our troops are making things worse rather than better:
During his congressional testimony, Army Gen. George W. Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said that troop reductions were necessary to "take away one of the elements that fuels the insurgency, that of the coalition forces as an occupying force." A smaller U.S. presence could alleviate some of the anger feeding the insurgency, Casey suggested.
We say remove them all and alleviate all of the anger.
October 2nd, 2005 at 11:41 am"If any question why we died,
October 2nd, 2005 at 2:22 pmTell them, because our fathers lied."
Rudyard Kipling, after the First World War.
what is the current us troop strength in Iraq? Please help. It is extremly important.
October 2nd, 2005 at 4:57 pmbilljpa@aol.com
Not too long ago, it broke that approximately a billion dollars that was meant to purchase weapons for the Iraqi military and police forces had simply disappeared. It was "spent" by the Iraqi government on a series of worthless arms contacts. Is this the reason that readiness is lagging? Do we know? Has anyone asked? Come on, where's the liberal media when I need them?
October 2nd, 2005 at 5:41 pmbill: The troops come and go, but General Vines said a month ago that there are approximately 140,000.
October 2nd, 2005 at 8:30 pmhttp://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2005/tr20050902-3845.html
Gen. Abizaid said on MTP today that there were 340,000 troops in the region last year, so now we have less than half of that, making it sem like progress -- when did we have 350,000?
October 2nd, 2005 at 11:22 pmI think he was counting more than troops in Iraq to make his false argument. Both he and Casey were on TV this morning to crawdad.
#1 14 bases?
Have you seen their plans for bases in Iraq? Run check, you'll find a few more.
As long as carlyle group is still around, you won't see peace on this planet.
As long as Halliburton, Bechtel and the like have shrubco it will be beans for us and pork for them.
As long as shrubco goes unpruned the devistation of democracy will continue for decades!
Do you really want barbara and jenna running things 20 years from now?
Think about it, they are in their 20's. 35 is the current legal age for president (like those two pay attention to the law). If dumbya finds a way to steal yet another election that puts us at 2012 before we have a chance of correcting things. That leaves only a 4 year window of sanity in the white house (if then) and you guessed it, the spaun of the devil are running age.
Hell if Hitler had the shrubs lack of ethics, we would be speaking german by now. Or those of us left would be.
October 3rd, 2005 at 4:55 amMaybe I'm missing something from the repugnants. How can it be considered "cut and run" if you've already declared "mission accomplished"?
October 3rd, 2005 at 7:12 amOctober 3, 2005
October 3rd, 2005 at 2:35 pmWhat's Wrong With Cutting and Running?
by Gen. (ret.) William E. Odom
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/odom.php?articleid=7487
Am I paranoid and delusional? Or does this story have legs?
Now, if all this stuff is true and the developing storm with the Bushgate scandals and the illegal incursion in Iraq turning to shit and Katrina etc. etc..
If, if , if all that stuff and rest is emerging don't you think DUBYA has an escape parachute being packed up. He is not that stupid. Put yourself in his place. I would be thinking about it. Wouldn't you? George W. Bush is all about managing perception, not process.
What is a good way out of Iraq? How about the face saving "The Avian flu pandemic is coming so we must bring home the troops to manage and quarantine population."
By even a complete fool has to realize that if he wants any good historical reviews he needs to mend his ways.
Have you noticed how all the talking heads are talking about Avian flu since at a recent press conference Bush mentioned it as a major problem?
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Inauguration/story?id=406639&page=1 Bush's announcement
October 5th, 2005 at 9:55 pmhttp://msnbc.msn.com/id/9603271/ Background
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N05542114.htm More background
"BSR, You think it is cowardice; I think it is false bravado and foolhardy to not recognize failure.
Comment by Marie — October 1, 2005 @ 12:45 pm "
Marie, you've been rooting for failure since the beginning - you're pitiful.
October 6th, 2005 at 8:18 pm#77 MA: Sorry to inform you that you mistake "rooting for failure" for acknowledging failure. You're the one who is pitiful for supporting a mindless, ruthless, worthless, truthless, wayward, unscrupulous, corrupt beyond all belief administration. You must be a drunk like George Bush or a drug addled blowhard like Rush Limbaugh.
October 6th, 2005 at 10:12 pm