Tom Friedman: ‘Staying the Course Is Pointless,’ It’s Time To ‘Disengage’ From Iraq
Tom Friedman: ‘Staying the Course Is Pointless,’ It’s Time To ‘Disengage’ From Iraq
For two-and-a-half years, New York Times columnist Tom Friedman has been arguing that that we need to give the Bush administration’s “stay the course” approach six more months. Some examples from FAIR:
“What we’re gonna find out, Bob, in the next six to nine months is whether we have liberated a country or uncorked a civil war.” [CBS's Face the Nation, 10/3/04]
“I think we’re in the end game now…. I think we’re in a six-month window here where it’s going to become very clear and this is all going to pre-empt I think the next congressional election—that’s my own feeling— let alone the presidential one.” [NBC's Meet the Press, 9/25/05]
“We’ve teed up this situation for Iraqis, and I think the next six months really are going to determine whether this country is going to collapse into three parts or more or whether it’s going to come together.” [CBS's Face the Nation, 12/18/05]
Now, Friedman has finally run out of patience. In today’s New York Times, Friedman writes “It is now obvious that we are not midwifing democracy in Iraq. We are baby-sitting a civil war” and it’s time to “disengage.” An excerpt:
[T]hree years of efforts to democratize Iraq are not working. That means “staying the course†is pointless, and it’s time to start thinking about Plan B — how we might disengage with the least damage possible.
…But the administration now has to admit what anyone — including myself — who believed in the importance of getting Iraq right has to admit: Whether for Bush reasons or Arab reasons, it is not happening, and we can’t throw more good lives after good lives.
Finally, the war in Iraq has so divided us at home and abroad that leaving, while bringing other problems, might also make it easier to build coalitions to deal with post-U.S. Iraq, Iran, Hezbollah and Syria. All these problems are connected. We need to deal with Iran and Syria, but from a position of strength — and that requires a broad coalition.
The longer we maintain a unilateral failing strategy in Iraq, the harder it will be to build such a coalition, and the stronger the enemies of freedom will become.
Welcome to the club Tom.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
1 Friedman = 6 months
August 4th, 2006 at 8:47 amAs long as Bush believes that it is his christian duty to kill all the Muslims, he will keep the troops in Iraq.
Can’t trust Republicans to tell the truth.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:49 amI’m happy that Tom has come to see the light, but I’m disappointed that we won’t be able to use the “Friedman” as a measure of time anymore.
Let’s hope the Bush Administration comes to terms with Iraq soon.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:50 amGee, I guess Tom is like the rest of us guys, SIX is very loooong.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:54 am“It is now obvious that we are not midwifing democracy in Iraq. We are baby-sitting a civil war†and it’s time to “disengage.â€
YOu go to college to say that?
August 4th, 2006 at 8:59 amRumsfeld supposedly has offered up his resignation twice.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:04 amThe real story here is that Bush can’t bring himself to accept it,
becasue it may make him look bad.
Isn’t that a great reason to continue pursuing a bad plan anyway?
I’m the divider, not the decider.
Wait – if we don’t have the Friedman as a unit of measure, what do we fall back on? The Biden? That’s 5 YEARS! Bad omen …
August 4th, 2006 at 9:05 amI say we give Tom Friedman 6 months to explain his fascination with “six months” in waiting for action.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:05 amThink how the troops will feel after another 6 months, and another 6 months
August 4th, 2006 at 9:07 amThere comes a time when we have to say enough is enough OR explain what the plan is
the stubborn ones in denial are starting to agree that the war is pointless and global warming is real…
…it must be about three months to an election
August 4th, 2006 at 9:16 am[...] Welcome to the club Tom. Source: Tom Friedman: ‘Staying the Course Is Pointless,’ It’s Time To ‘Disengage’ From Iraq - Media [Feed] [...]
August 4th, 2006 at 9:24 amSixmo changes his mind! Wow!
August 4th, 2006 at 9:28 amRobertson jumping ship on Bush’s “I don’t like science guys” policy on global warming and now Friedman switching sides on the Bush administration’s “stay the course…even if it means getting everyone killed” policy. It just might ruin Bush’s vacation. That brush is gonna take a beating.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:29 amDont worry the “Friedman” measure of time will live on forever…
I find it fascinating in the last two days :
Abizaid has basically admitted widespread civil war looming
Friedman has jumped ship
Hilary is all of a sudden speaking up about war errors and demanding answers
from Rummy
Anyone think it has anything to do with Lamonts 13 point lead in Lieberman race
(Believe me I dont think the war is the only thing propelling Lamont to victory but its a part of a larger issue about establishement DEMS and their kow-towing to the Bush Admin for the last 3 years)
August 4th, 2006 at 9:30 amRumsfeld supposedly has offered up his resignation twice.
The real story here is that Bush can’t bring himself to accept it,
becasue it may make him look bad.
Isn’t that a great reason to continue pursuing a bad plan anyway?
I’m the divider, not the decider.
Comment by Zimzone — August 4, 2006 @ 9:04 am
Bad and weak. As for Rummy, he could have resigned anyway. By offering his resignation…twice…he looks good to the rightwingers.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:32 amI think it’s time to withdraw, let Iraq be partitioned into 3 countries and vigorously support the Kurds, they don’t hate us yet.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:39 amPass the smelling salts. Or should I remind Tom that the sanity train left the station a long time ago.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:43 amI guess the six months are finally up.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:47 amLet me see if I understand the Friedman Plan. We bring the troops home from Iraq so we can organize another “coalition of the willing” to wage war against Syria and Iran. One thing I like about Friedman…he’s a strategic thinker. He’s also a NeoCon stooge.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:59 am(Note: this post is eighteen months old (1/11/05). Events, opinions and policies have now caught up with this year old post. Current prediction, “When They Stand Up, We’re Screwed” follows:)
GHOST OF ARAFAT
Iraq is now a civil war. We have simply chosen a side. References to Vietnam are tactically correct, but passe politically. The analogies are Israel/Palestine, American Revolution and Northern Ireland.
The ghost of Arafat will appear from the Sunni side and George B. to his enormous bile-choking displeasure will have to deal. Were that it were otherwise but this is written.
Fielding one per cent of the Sunni fighting-age men as active insurgents/freedom fighters with three percent as cadre (40,000) creates a stalemate. They can not dislodge us and our Shia forces nor can we pacify them.
Personally I would find this leader (or group) now and begin the next phase. Offer them administrative control of electric and water reconstruction projects. They create no-kill, no-maim zones, implement the projects, Halliburton yes, Halliburton no, who cares, and we release the money on a quasi ‘completion’ basis.
This gambit lacks all pride and ego but we do get to stay a while.
Sarge might say “Light em if you got em,” for a change.
(created by CAJ 1.11.05)
_______________________________________________
WHEN THEY STAND UP, WE’RE SCREWED
August 4th, 2006 at 9:59 am.
Of course we all know the expression “When they stand up, we’ll stand down.”
On or around Valentine’s Day 2007 the Shia will have sufficient forces under arms to feel confident that they can dominate, decimate and destroy the Sunnis.
This being so, they will ask/tell/demand American forces to withdraw in order that they may proceed to dominate, decimate and destroy the Sunnis.
Given that they will, the Shia, pop the question to Mr Rumsfeld, et al, it begs this question.
“Donald, you love irony and sarcasm, what exactly are you going to respond when the Islamo-radicals ask you to withdraw so that they can slaughter the secular Sunnis?”
Perhaps they’ll phrase it this way. Thanks for the guns and uniforms. And by the way, yes, this is a civil war you silly, silly man, you friend of Zion. Now leave.
Oh irony, if you don’t move to protect and empower the very forces you came to disempower, then Iran (i.e. the Shia) will control Iraq and become an abutter to Israel.
“When they stand up, we’re screwed” is staring the world in the face.
St. Valentine’s Day it will be.
Since when do Columnists dictate policy?
August 4th, 2006 at 10:02 am…. so Bush gets hammered for making course corrections as the situation on the ground in Iraq changes, but it’s OK for Friedman to make a complete reversal and insist on a pullout of Iraq?
Cut and run is the correct phrase for those are there for the first couple battles, but then run when it doesn’t rap up on their schedule – sorry that war is so inconvenient for liberal pundits. Both Afghanistan and Iraq passed constitutions, held elections and installed democraticly elected governments. They held up their end, we need to hold up ours.
August 4th, 2006 at 10:03 amTwo years ago (at the end of Friedman’s first six month period) while talking to my father, who hangs on Friedman’s every word, I assailed Friedman for being way behind the curve. I had no idea then just how far behind Friedman would get.
August 4th, 2006 at 10:12 am#24 You’re doing a heckuva job, Jason. I am assuming, of course, that your job trolling this board is to systematically mischaracterize the arguments of your opponents in this debate. Raising straw men, rewriting history. All in a day’s job for Jason.
August 4th, 2006 at 10:15 amAnother non-believer. Phooey….
-
August 4th, 2006 at 10:18 amthis is the key. I have been against this war from the beginning. But, I think there needs to be a dialogue on how to withdraw the troops without creating a humanitarian and strategic nightmare. Bushies still insist that every thing is hunk dorie and we need to stay the course. While anti war activist seem to be saying “lets bail out of Iraq” without thinking about the consequences. “Staying the course” is not a plan for success , but “bailing out” could almost be as big a disaster as the decision to invade.
August 4th, 2006 at 10:38 amok… when you lose the “moustache of understanding”, it’s time to call it…
August 4th, 2006 at 10:42 amThis is the first sensible thing that Friedman has ever said that I can recall! The US troops must be pulled out of Iraq immediately and Rumsfeld must resign as Secretary of Defense! The Congress must draw up articles of impeachment against Bush and Cheney for the Iraq fiasco!
August 4th, 2006 at 10:49 amSo, what are we supposed to do now? Pat him on the back, say “Welcome to the side of the angels!” and hand him a Slurpee?
Personally, I prefer the Eichmann treatment, You know,,, the rope usually reserved for WAR CRIMINALS? Because this bloviating bastard is exactly as responsible for the death and destruction as, say, Cheney and Rumsfeld. There’s blood on his moustache, and this must not be ignored.
Please… no pass for this guy. He shouldn’t be allowed to turn his big, sudden Damascus Experience into another best-seller, and keep setting the American discourse with his much sought-after Expert Takes on world events.
Henceforth, as far as the public and the world are concerned, he must retire his goddamned “opinions” (right, like most pundits, he’s just a very bright and educated guy, with some strong “opinions”… not like he’s a mouthpiece for any vested interests with an agenda, or anything…).
August 4th, 2006 at 10:59 amOf course EVERYONE is changing their minds, cause the situation is FUBAR.
Time to re-deploy. You chickenhawk, blood-thirsty types can call it what you want, but “a rose (re-deployment) by any other name is still a rose.”
And, uh, Jason, we’ve done our part, you and your fundamentally disabled brain just don’t know when to quit.
August 4th, 2006 at 11:00 am#31 All too true ,its now a case of screwed if U do, screwed if U don’t !Don’t you think , some neo con think tank ran this possible scenario years ago ? These jokers mean to strand us in the ME with our consent or not ! Friedman isn’t proposing we just leave but that we use the unstable condition we have created to pursuade a new coalition to invade Iran and Iraq because of the importance of the ME region and unfortunately because of the oil there it will probably work ! There are likely to be several completing plans for the conquest of the mid east .Plan A ( the cake walk plan ) is no longer working ! Welcome to WW3 everybody !
August 4th, 2006 at 11:05 amTrying to keep islamic fundamantalists from running a country in the middle east is like trying to keep the water away from you while standing in a pool. I don’t think these guys get that.
August 4th, 2006 at 11:09 amI love the “we don’t believe in timetables” meme. What that really means in the “”Stay the Course” philosophy is:
We aren’t going to try and improve the situation and we are going to let it continue to deteriorate indefinitely.
…Just keep it up guys. You’ve alienated most of the rest of the world, over half of Americans, now you’re losing most of the Military and diehard conservatives.
August 4th, 2006 at 11:21 amEver since GWB was elected President the left has been on a crusade to undermine him in every conceivable way. From the so-called stolen election of 2000 and 2004 to the claim that Bush lied about WMD’s in Iraq. Just to add-on to that line; to charge the president with ineptitude might fall within some form of reasonable discourse, but to charge him with deception with respect to WMD’s is to ignore the preponderance of evidence available at the time the decision to go to war was made. However, the left has completely ignored this and distorted the facts to meet its political needs. Why?
August 4th, 2006 at 11:31 amLet me say this; opponents of the war can rightly challenges the wisdom of time and place, even strategies and tactics, but they cannot turn reality on its head. It is not American troops who are murdering hundreds of people every week, it is the terrorists. It is enough to make even open-minded people wonder if hating America rather than combating terrorism is the real aim of the left in this country. Why do I get these feelings the left feels it’s their god given birthright to hold power in this country and anyone or anything that stands in the way is slandered or called liars or what have you.
This president has made mistakes, even the God figure (Clinton) for whom the left likes to hold up as the pillar of everything good has made mistakes, but he was never attacked by the right in the same fashion in which the left attacks this current president. The BJ thing was the one exception, and it was wrong. However, I don’t recall people calling Clinton a fascist, a war criminal when he decided to bomb Serbia/Kosavo etc… I happened to like Clinton and he did some good things. But the hate going on for Bush and this country, and the unwillingness to defend it against the islamofacists is really something to see. The divisive behavior going on now if it continues is going to be the end of us all.
Hey Tom
We have had our tour extended by six months, after being here for 13.
Thanx
RIP
SGT Stephen R Sherman
C CO 1-5 Inf (Stryker)
KIA 03 Feb 05
Mosul. Iraq
Or as Tony Snow, the Repuppetcans, The DLC (Down Low Conservatives), and the No-Nothing-Cons would say:
August 4th, 2006 at 11:39 am#1462
[...] Following up on Chase’s post on why Iraq is still broken (and in my opinion can’t even be fixed), let me extend to Tom Friedman a welcome to the reality-based community. [...]
August 4th, 2006 at 11:42 amComment by Popmycherry
HAHAHAHAHAH MMMAYBBBE WHHHEN I SSSTOPPP LLLAUFFFING I CCAN CCCOMMMENT ONN EEEACH OFFF YOURRR RIDICCCULOUS PPPOINTSSS HAHAHAHA
August 4th, 2006 at 11:44 ami thought i would add a ‘friedman’ to the urban dictionary, but, it is already there!
August 4th, 2006 at 11:53 amDemocratic Sen. Mark Dayton (Minn.) put it very well at yesterday’s hearing….The violence and lack of progress in Iraq over the past three years since the toppling of Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship represents a massive failure on the part of the Iraqi people and leadership. If they cannot seize this historic opportunity to put aside their religious and ethnic differences and create a peaceful, sustained democratic society, the U.S. and its military should disengage from Iraq. Our military should not have to pay for the failures of the Iraqis.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:01 pmthe U.S. and its military should disengage from Iraq.
Comment by exley — August 4, 2006 @ 12:01 pm
This is treasonous talk and it plays right into the hands of the terrorists.
If we pull out now, all those soldiers would have died in vain.
You are demoralising the troops and emboldening the terrorists.
Stay the course!
/sarcasm off
August 4th, 2006 at 12:05 pmHas exley just revealed BushCo’s “strategery” for exiting Iraq as the all-too-familiar tactic of projecting the blame? Will there be a speech by Bush soon that goes something like: “the U.S. brought to the Iraqi people a seedling called democracy, purchased at the expense of the blood of its brave soldiers. Due to lack of will and responsible leadership on the part of the Iraqi people, that seedling has been left to wither. Therefore, I have ordered the removal of the majority of its soldiers from Iraq immediately.” An October surprise?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:17 pmIf you damn liberals would just quit hating Bush so much, the Iraqis will greet us as liberators with sweets and flowers, and will spontaneously form a pro-Western democrasy, and all the other tyrants in the Middle East will get real scared and quit so those countries will have democracy too, and they will let us have all the oil we want.
And all you have to do is stop hating Bush. Why can’t you do that one simple little thing? Do you hate America that much?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:21 pmLet’s be realistic for a moment and forget about which party did what, and I say this as somebody who comes from a military family and has two close relatives in Iraq.
We’re caught between Iraq and a hard place. If we leave, there will be chaos. If we stay… well… the chaos is getting worse anyway. The only thing uniting the Shi’a and Sunnis right now is that they both hate us. If we leave, it is more likely than not that the Shi’a will engage in ethnic cleansing beyond all comprehension, and we will be blamed for allowing it to happen. If we stay, the odds are that there will be a decades-long civil war with U.S. troops caught in the crossfire and blamed for allowing it to happen.
Iraq as a nation is an artificial construct, and the only way to hold it together is with brute force. Saddam Hussein understood this. He also understood that democracy is incompatible with the idea of holding together a country that essentially doesn’t want to be held together. This appears to suggest that the only viable option is to let Iraq balkanize into three separate republics.
Yet even this creates problems. Turkey will never tolerate an independent Kurdistan on its southern border (they have already threatened to invade Iraqi Kurdistan twice, even with U.S. troops present). The Shi’ites would get the oil fields in the south, and that would empower Iran more than ever. It is not inconceivable that Iraqi Shi’a would form a union with Iran. The idea of an all-powerful Shi’a union would send shockwaves throughout the Middle East, particularly in Sunni nations such as Syria and Saudi Arabia. As for the Sunnis, well they would get the impoverished center of the country. This would no doubt become a breeding ground for Al-Qaida (which is, after all, a Sunni organization).
These are not worst case scenarios. They are already happening right under our noses. But we don’t have leaders who understand, much less try to explain, these complex issues. Instead, we are force-fed with childish cliches like “stay the course” and “cut and run”.
This is not an issue to be trivialized. It is about what kind of nation we want to be in the 21st centry. It is about how we interact with the rest of the world as other global powers begin to emerge. It is too late to kvetch over whether or not the invasion was a good idea. The preponderance of evidence is that it was a calamitous idea. What matters now is how do we get out with our dignity intact—and the truth is, neither party has any idea how to do that. Most Republicans think that if we keep doing the same things that have consistently failed and listen to the same folks who have been consistently wrong about the Middle East, things will somehow work out. Most Democrats (and I am one of them) advocate withdrawing troops, but we don’t give much thought to the consequences.
There is one option, but it is radical and neither party will ever go for it. Forget all this flowery hubris about democracy. We pick a side, create a Saddam-like strongman and return Iraq to iron-fisted dictatorship, just as we did in numerous third-world countries during the Cold War. As far as I can see, this is the only way to restore stability to Iraq before we leave, but it would be the ultimate admission of the failure of neoconservative idealism.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:34 pmActually, PLC, as I indicated, I was repeating Democratic Sen. Mark Dayton’s words. And yes, if the president were to make such a statement or something similar, he would be right. As I said yesterday on another thread: “I supported the liberation of Iraq …But we are not there to get in the middle of a civil war between Islamic sects. We have removed Saddam. We have given the Iraqi people every opportunity and assistance to create and sustain a democratic state. If (and this appears more likely with each passing week) they are incapable of living together in peace and running their own affairs in a peaceful, democratic, and civilized way, then we should reconsider our presence there. You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink (To break out a cliche).”
August 4th, 2006 at 12:34 pmPLC: Who will Bush blame for losing Iraq? Good question. But the answer is very predictable.
The persons responsible for losing Iraq are: 1) The Democrats, 2) Liberals, 3) Iraqis who didn’t accept the glorious gift of freedom.
Notice who’s not on that list: 1) Al Qaeda, 2) Islamomuhamadianfascists, 3) Terrorists, 4) Insurgents, 5) Iran. Don’t wanna let them know that they won.
And of course, Bush/Cheney/Rummy will not accept one particle of blame.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:42 pmPLC #42
You’re the type of person who would watch someone rape your own child in front of you and then place the blame on that child. Why? Because you have no moral character and/or guts to do anything about it.
Are you laughing now?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:45 pmYou’re the type of person who would watch someone rape your own child in front of you and then place the blame on that child. Why? Because you have no moral character and/or guts to do anything about it. Are you laughing now? Comment by Popmycherry
No, actually, I’m scratching my head, perplexed about where in the world you came up with that assessment of me. Any particular post you are referencing?
August 4th, 2006 at 12:50 pmme too, plc… wow… not even a bad joke…
but your comment below:
Will there be a speech by Bush soon that goes something like: “the U.S. brought to the Iraqi people a seedling called democracy, purchased at the expense of the blood of its brave soldiers. Due to lack of will and responsible leadership on the part of the Iraqi people, that seedling has been left to wither. Therefore, I have ordered the removal of the majority of its soldiers from Iraq immediately.†An October surprise?
Comment by PLC (PatrioticLiberalChristian) — August 4, 2006 @ 12:17 pm
yeesh! don’t give ‘em ideas!
August 4th, 2006 at 1:01 pmthat’ll be interesting if any of your phrasology makes it public… i’ll be listening ;-)
Are you laughing now?
Comment by Popmycherry — August 4, 2006 @ 12:45 pm
I have to wonder how, where you learnt to string so many strawman argumens together.
Is there a Troll Academy of Superior Studies?
That was weird…
August 4th, 2006 at 1:18 pmComment by Popmycherry.
You are completely delusional!!!!
August 4th, 2006 at 1:19 pm#52
I apologize, that was a bit over the top. I guess I just wanted to get you to wake up and understand this war on terror is not a laughing matter. People seem to want to place blame on the leaders in our country when in fact they are simply trying to protect us. The ways and means are debatable. However, terrorism is real and if we don’t confront it, we are doomed to its ideology and the world will be worse off. Iraq is one of those places I feel was contributing to this ideology. It obviously stirs up emotions. I think we need to take the politics out and start supporting our efforts to stamp terrorism out.
History has shown us that overwhelming strength can change ideologies. Look at Germany and Japan for example. It took many lives and treasure to do this and politics didn’t stand in our way then. But today politics means more. The country was together then fighting evil, but today we want things to be a drive-through window.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:25 pmTom Friedman, your crocodile tears are unconvincing. It is you and people like you whose arrogant belief in the myth of American exceptionalism has brought the ME to the brink of a major war and made my family less safe. F*** you.
August 4th, 2006 at 1:29 pmIraq is a catastrophic foreign policy debacle. It has alienated us from our allies and generated hatred among Muslims across the world. It has weakened our military, forcing our troops into an extended occupation in the midst of a growing civil war for which they have neither appetite nor training. It is a recruiting boon for al-Qaida. It has sorely weakened our world-wide foreign policy influence, as demonstrated graphically in the current conflict in Lebanon. It has cost nearly 2,700 American lives, over 20,000 Americans wounded — and an estimated 50,000 Iraqi deaths. It has compromised our budget priorities, spending about $400 billion already — with the estimated cost likely to exceed $1 trillion. The budget is a statement of our moral choices — and this is a deeply immoral choice. Hey Tom, can we cut and run from this mess.
August 4th, 2006 at 2:32 pm56 Popmycherry
August 4th, 2006 at 2:34 pmApology accepted and appreciated. I take both the “war” against terror and the War in Iraq as extremely serious. But, I have never seen any evidence that they are equivalent and events have played out my fears, that the misplaced attack on Iraq further destabalized the Middle East and has derailed any real efforts to curtail terrorism. Terrorism is increasing because of our very occupying presence in Iraq. BushCo with their PNAC agenda have been a major part of the problem, no where near a solution. I am tired of their excuses and simultaneously stating how wonderful things are and paradoxically projecting blame for what is going so horribly wrong. Progressives, democrats, the left, etc have legitimately been very aggressively criticising BushCo., unlike the very illegitimate attacks of the conservatives, republicans, right against Clinton. For the most part, we have been finding fault with real, verifiable actions on BushCo’s part. Compare this with the made-up past attacks against Clinton (murdering Foster and Brown, Whitewater, having an illegitimate black child, ‘wag the dog”, filegate, their marriage) and the continuing attacks and blame against Clinton which are both hilarious and depressing. Who are we in the U.S. to think we have the right to “change ideology” in another country? Why did we squander our standing with the world and our domestic unity, necessary to fight terrorism, in order to attack Iraq (the multiple choice answers from BushCo don’t count)? Why haven’t we had true debate about what we are going to do in response to terrorism? Why don’t we admit mistakes when we make them instead of trying to arrogantly maintain a false superiority? These are my questions or morality that have yet to be answered. I take no backseat to anyone in terms of morality or patriotism.
Thinking forward. If the troops come back from Iraq, Afghanistan, Colombia, Germany, Phillipines, South Korea, etc, etc, then obviously the production of airplanes and airstrips, munitions and humvees, smart bombs and submarines, boots, brass buckles and bullshit would all come tumbling.
Well, that would put a few out of work. Also, the price of oil might rise. That might put a few out of work. At which point, house prices might fall.
At which point, one wonders, will the administration confess that the war in Iraq is about oil, and that they lost.
August 4th, 2006 at 3:26 pmJust don`t talk about the twin towers. Or should that be the triple towers?
“All these problems are connected. We need to deal with Iran and Syria, but from a position of strength….”
August 4th, 2006 at 3:32 pm~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So, we need to get out of Iraq to get ourselves in position to wage war with Iran and Syria? Thanks Tom, for describing the pullout rationale in a fashion even a neocon could love and put to good use.
Staying the course and “let’s leave now”, are both bad ideas….Im a democrats and i hate this war because it causes so much suffering BUT i sincerily believe that if we leave now, the shiites will try to wipe out the sunnies just like the nazies tried to eliminate all jews on earth..and this is not what we want to see.
THIS IS WHAT IM SUGGESTING…BUSH SHOULD PULL BACK HIS PRIDE, APOLOGIZE TO THE FRENCH AND THE OTHER EUROPEAN UNION THAT THEY OFFENDED BECAUSE THEY DIDNT WANT TO SUPPORT THE INVASION, AND ASK THEM , “BEGG” THEM TO HELP OUT WITH TROOPS…I BELEIVE THAT WE NEED AS MUCH AS 1 MILLION FOREIGN TROOPS IN IRAQ TO PACIFY THE VIOLENCE,DISARM EVERY SINGLE CIVILIANS,SECURE THE ENTIRE COUNTRY..BUILT A VERY CREDIBLE IRAQI ARMY THAT CAN BE TRUSTED..TEACH THE YOUNG IRAQIES HOW TO BE CIVILIZE…THEN ONCE THE ARMY IS FULLIED BUILT AND READY TO TAKE OVER, THEN THE FOREIGN TROOPS CAN START LEAVING.
MY POINT IS, A VERY IMMENSE FORCE OF FOREIGN TROOPS IS NEEDED TO SCARE OFF THE INSURGENCY AND TOTALLY DISARM THEM..I THINK YOU WILL HAVE TO FORCE IRAQ TO ACCEPT DEMOCRACY…RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE ONLY 130K AND THE ARMY IS STRETCHED OUT TO THE LIMIT PLUS THE FACT THAT WE’RE HAVING TROUBLE RECRUITING DURING TIMES OF WAR..NO ONE WANT TO ENLIST NOW AND GET SEND TO IRAQ.
August 4th, 2006 at 4:54 pmWow Maria you make it sound so easy to just put an army in that can be trusted, and teaching the children to be civilized. Just those two things are monumental tasks. Our government doesn’t even want to pay for domestic programs to teach our own kids how to be civilized. I want some of what you are smokin’.
August 4th, 2006 at 5:22 pmNoone wants to be the ‘last man to die for a mistake’, Maria
August 4th, 2006 at 7:10 pmHey, Tommy, millions of us understood this reality years ago, BEFORE our country sent thousands to their deaths.
I usually don’t say that we told you so, but WE TOLD YOU SO.
How does it feel to have been a primary enabler of this total disaster?
August 4th, 2006 at 7:15 pm“In this truce, both parties will enjoy security and stability and we will build Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by the war. There is no defect in this solution other than preventing the flow of hundreds of billions to the influential people and war merchants in America, who supported Bush’s election campaign with billions of dollars.
Hence, we can understand the insistence of Bush and his gang to continue the war.”
Osama bin Laden, April 2006
Welcome to the club, Tom. The club that wishes for defeat and for us to abandon Iraq so al Qaeda can have their way with it. It’s hard to tell if that club is the Angry Left or our enemies anymore.
August 4th, 2006 at 8:21 pmdon’t shoot yourself in the foot harpie
August 4th, 2006 at 9:05 pmgo polish your jackboots ,its time to invade Poland
August 4th, 2006 at 9:06 pmand I am angry !!!!
August 4th, 2006 at 9:07 pm#66
Wrong Hippie.
Tom is joining a club he should’ve joined 3 or 4 years ago …
The Club of Realisitc Military Leadership:
‘ … He expresses even more concern about the task the U.S. military might face after a victory. “What is postwar Iraq going to look like, with the Kurds and the Sunnis and the Shiites? That’s a huge question, to my mind. It really should be part of the overall campaign plan.†… ‘
‘ … The administration may be discussing the issue behind closed doors, Schwarzkopf says, but he thinks it hasn’t sufficiently explained its thinking to the world, especially its assessment of the time, people and money needed. “I would hope that we have in place the adequate resources to become an army of occupation,†he warns, “because you’re going to walk into chaos.†…
Retired General Norman Schwartzkopf from “Desert Caution’ – January 28, 2003
In addition – Ret. General Tony McPeak, who commanded the U.S. Air Force during Desert Storm, switched parties ( From Republican to Democrat ) because of the Bush Administration’s insistence on going to war …
John Shalikashvili – The Chariman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff after Colin Powell – also switched from Republican to Democrat as a result of the Bush Administration’s insistence on this war.
While Colin Powell’s record is “mixed” as Secretary of State ( with the U. N. Speech and all ) – he did lay down his Club of Realisitc Military Leadership card when he said to Bush re: invading Iraq – “You break it, You own it …”
Brent Scowcroft - who served under “big time liberals” Gerald Ford and George H. W. Bush – was also against this debacle. Scowcroft had also achieved the rank of general before moving to politics.
The U.S Army War College said that it wasn’t a good idea to do this in 2003.
So take your bullsh#t “liberals are with Osama” pistol, shove it up your @ss and pull the trigger, Hippie.
And then call Rumsfeld to come and clean up the mess.
August 4th, 2006 at 9:27 pmFriedman just wants to get off the bus before this is offically declared world war three. For that matter, I notice that the latest Bushie move is to create a US official secrets act. Now they are going to try to make all the evidence that they had plenty of reason to know how bad this would be illegal to discuss. I personally hope to do federal time for chanting, “You break it — you bought it! You break it — you bought it! You break it — you bought it! You break it — you bought it!” in Lafayette Park. Has a nice syncopated bounce to it as a demo chant, don’t you think?
While I’m at it, does anybody besides me wonder how many of the Bushies are hopped up on supplemental testosterone? Bet that’ll be a state secret, too. Anybody remember if Hitler did hormones? Or was it just bennies and coke?
August 4th, 2006 at 9:58 pm“…the war in Iraq has so divided us at home and abroad that leaving, while bringing other problems, might also make it easier to build coalitions to deal with post-U.S. Iraq, Iran, Hezbollah and Syria. All these problems are connected. We need to deal with Iran and Syria, but from a position of strength — and that requires a broad coalition.”
Here’s the Syria-Lebanon connection Tom: it’s the Syria-Lebanon pipeline which moves oil from fields in northern Iraq to the Mediterranean Sea giving then a straight shot to New Orleans and Houston. The route via Kuwait-Persian Gulf-Arabian Sea-Red sea is 750 miles longer and ties up oil tankers in pointless movement east, south, and back north and west again.
We can’t accomplish our mission in Iraq—stealing oil—if we can’t ship it out, and we can’t ship it out the best way unless we control the terminus of the Syria-Lebanon pipeline. Look at a map, why don’t you?
August 5th, 2006 at 8:32 amThe route via Kuwait-Persian Gulf-Arabian Sea-Red sea is 750 miles longer and ties up oil tankers in pointless movement east, south, and back north and west again.
August 6th, 2006 at 4:00 amThe situation in Iraq represents the biggest foreign policy mistake in recent US history, and Friedman outlines the only strategy that stands a chance of salvaging something positive out of this extremely complex debacle. The United States should announce to the entire world that it has made a gigantic miscalculation with respect to Iraq, and it should quietly and humbly adopt Plan B. Too much is at stake if it tries to do otherwise.
August 6th, 2006 at 7:16 amMaria: You are wholly correct. However, to implement your solution requires int’l co-operation, disarmament and U.S. leaders with great moral integrity and courage. Such leadership does not presently exist. EXORCISE YOUR RIGHT, VOTE!
August 6th, 2006 at 11:23 amWhy isn’t gangstalking ever in the news? Go to http://www.stop-predatory-gangstalking.net/ and you will see what it is. If you use the search engine mamma.com and search for gangstalking, you should get 30 items and number 15 tells that the cops are all in on this. Why don’t we do something to stop this? Read a book called “L.A. Secret Police” written by an ex-cop and he tells all their dirty little secrets and tricks.
August 7th, 2006 at 12:46 am