NYT: ‘Leave Iraq.’
NYT: ‘Leave Iraq.’
In an editorial this morning, the New York Times writes:
It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.
Like many Americans, we have put off that conclusion, waiting for a sign that President Bush was seriously trying to dig the United States out of the disaster he created by invading Iraq without sufficient cause, in the face of global opposition, and without a plan to stabilize the country afterward. [...]
This country faces a choice. We can go on allowing Mr. Bush to drag out this war without end or purpose. Or we can insist that American troops are withdrawn as quickly and safely as we can manage — with as much effort as possible to stop the chaos from spreading.
UPDATE: Steve Benen has more.
UPDATE II: E&P previously noted “many American newspapers have long been harshly critical of the conduct of the war in Iraq, but very few major papers have ever called for a U.S. withdrawal any time soon.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Pretty soon, Dubya may actually have to go fight, as he will be the only one left. AND he proved he was a coward during the Vietnam war.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:05 amEven the LA Times beat them to this conclusion. But oh well…
July 8th, 2007 at 10:11 amWe should have never gone in the first place but since we did, we should have left the moment we found that there were no WMD and paid reparations on the way out the door.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:13 amGood thing we didn’t have the NYT editorial board during the American Revolution.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:37 amImagine that Liberal Press having the audacity to print the majority opinion of the People. How dare they?
July 8th, 2007 at 10:39 amGreat article, if not more than too little too late.
The Live Earth concerts only adds to the frustration as Americans and the rest of the world wonder what kind of planet we’d have today if Al Gore had been president.
The GOP has proven itself to be the party of death, war, chaos, fear-mongering, abuses of civil rights and abuses of the planet. Hopefully, we will never see the day where they dominate the political landscape as they did.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:40 amLeave Iraq? No sh*t sherlock. Where were they in 2003 and 2004?
~Sean
July 8th, 2007 at 10:41 amWell, the Goracle is no fan of the men and women who protect our society.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/07/08/2007-07-08_son_is_gores_albatross.html?ref=rss
With Al Gore in the news for battling global warming and Al Gore 3rd in the news for getting toasted, my favorite NYPD detective recalled a story that helps explain how father and son each became a particular kind of loser.
The story was told to the detective by a Secret Service agent some years back as they worked security for a dignitary visiting New York. Such details largely consist of just standing there for as long as 12 hours and the talk turned to a day when the Secret Service agent was assigned to then-Vice President Gore.
The detective recalls the agent saying that he was outside a room where Gore was loudly berating Al 3rd for something to do with school. The agent then overheard the senior Gore say to his son something truly stunning.
“What, do you want to end up like those guys standing outside the door?”
The guys being the agent and his partners, highly trained and intensely dedicated individuals who remain ever-ready to take a bullet for whomever they are assigned to protect.
You would think that such selfless and motivated people would be perfect role models for a teenager having a little trouble staying on track.
You have to wonder if the son might have turned out differently if the father had asked the agent to take his boy under his wing.
“Now [the senior Gore] is probably wishing his son did end up like those guys outside his door,” the detective said yesterday.
Kind of like John Kerry calling our troops stupid.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:45 am#4
Good thing we didn’t have the NYT editorial board during the American Revolution.
Comment by Jake — July 8, 2007 @ 10:37 am
—–
Yeah… the similarities between those two wars are simply endless… (/sarcasm off)
July 8th, 2007 at 10:46 am#4 – Good thing we didn’t have these a$$holes running the show during the revolutionary war – we would have attacked Germany. FWIW – conservatives backed the british in that war.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:50 amJudiciary committee to call Patrick Fitzgerald to testify on Plame leak?
Oh my.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:51 amdale54:
Noted historian David McCoullough has indeed made the same comparison and concluded we would have LOST that war if we had the same media.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:52 amit’s a start… now, let’s have another one calling for bush and cheney to resign…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
July 8th, 2007 at 10:53 amI wish the right-wing trolls here were 1/100th as concerned with the reality of the situation in Iraq and the perilous state of the US military as they were with their pro-war and anti-dem talking points.
Sucks to find out you guys aren’t the great patriots you were told you were, eh?
July 8th, 2007 at 10:54 amUntil the power of love overcomes the love of power, we will never know peace.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:54 amGood thing we didn’t have these a$$holes running the show during the revolutionary war – we would have attacked Germany. FWIW – conservatives backed the british in that war.
Comment by Dreary Urbanite — July 8, 2007 @ 10:50 am
And it should be noted that largely the conservatives are the ones who wanted us to stay out of WWII.
Turns out you clowns are on the wrong end of yet another war.
July 8th, 2007 at 10:57 amCongrats to M12 for the “conservative fabricated anecdote of the day” award. Al Gore is a great American. Bush is the one who thinks the US military is full of fodder for his neo-con, Christofascist fantasies.
Laura Bush had it right when she said that “no one suffers more than her and George”. Barbara Bush hit the nail on the head when she felt that the people suffering during Hurricane Katrina thought that Chimpy flying over NO in Air Force 1 at 10,0000 was ‘the most important thing to the world’ to them.
Not to mention the “overheard” quote of George W. calling the US Consitution a “piece of Goddamned paper”.
-GSD
July 8th, 2007 at 10:57 am#12 – You can only make a comparison between the Iraq war and the Revolutionary war if you assume that we are playing the part of the British this time around. The Iraqis after all are not occupying us.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:01 am#16 – When was the last time a conservative president actually won a war anyway?
July 8th, 2007 at 11:02 amNot to mention the “overheard†quote of George W. calling the US Consitution a “piece of Goddamned paperâ€.
Oh, that fabricated nonsense again. Why does the Goracle hate our Secret Service?
July 8th, 2007 at 11:04 am#19
Ronald Reagan smashing the soviets and the Cold War.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:06 am>Why does the Goracle hate our Secret Service? -bowel movement 1-2
Why do you hate the concept of posting on topic???
July 8th, 2007 at 11:12 am#12 – You can only make a comparison between the Iraq war and the Revolutionary war if you assume that we are playing the part of the British this time around. The Iraqis after all are not occupying us.
Not at all. You have forgotten the Islamic invaders of 911.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:12 amWhy do you hate the concept of posting on topic???
I have to post it somewhere…and its not like liberals would make a thread bashing any Democrat not named Joseph Lieberman.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:13 amThe best line from the NYT piece was the last one: “Or we can insist that American troops are withdrawn as quickly and safely as we can manage — with as much effort as possible to stop the chaos from spreading.”
Chaos is word that should be in bold and underlined, for that is the Neo-Con only guiding strategy. They seek to keep the Federal Government in chaos and they seek to foster conflict and chaos abroad. Chaos spreads fear, leads to out of control spending, encourages war as the only solution, and it profits the political Neo-Con, the talking head Neo-Con, and the Military-Industrialist Neo-Con. Chaos is definitely a win-win for them.
A number of editorial pages and Americans in general are finally waking up to this fact. Cheney and company are not stupid, they are not inept, they are simply champions of Chaos. They put 20-somethings in charge of the DOJ; they put FEMA in the hands of a guy fired from the horse show circuit; they marshal an army of inexperinced loyal Bushies to Iraq to start a new government; and they do it all with a purpose. It’s Chaos!
GOPers would do well to purge their party of this Neo-Con parasite. After all they only favor their own, and that’s not other GOPers, but only other Neo-Cons.
But GOPers can continue to nurture their little parasite. For the love of country I sincerely wish they wouldn’t. But one thing I can guarentee is that for the next several election cycles, Bush/Cheney will be the gift that keeps on giving for the Democrats.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:18 amThanks for nothing NYT. And thanks for Judith Miller too.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:22 amI’m just going to go ahead and mention again that an “orderly exit” is going to take at least a year to complete.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:22 am> I have to post it somewhere.
No you don’t. Al Gore is a snob. Who the hell cares? Politicans job is to govern, not to be “one of the folks”. Should I randomly bring up that Tom Delay says things like “I am the federal government”, when hes asked to put out his cigar? Rich people are snooty…you think the Bush family is humble and down to earth?….wake up…. your “al gore is a snob” story isnt a story at all.. its just the way things are..
> Not at all. You have forgotten the Islamic invaders of 911.
Hahahahah. What exactly were they invading? the afterlife? hahahah. WHat territory were they trying to invade? So I suppose Timothy Mc Veigh and his cohorts were the Christian invaders of (whatever date it was),,,right?
If it turns out Timothy McVeigh was part of a wider conspiracy, how do you suggest we should we respond to these invading christians militias?
You know where I can find that roster that lists all the members of Al-Queda so we can wipe them all out and declare victory??
July 8th, 2007 at 11:23 amAn equitable draft to fill the army with soldiers would bring this disaster to a quick end. It would help avoid future mistakes as well.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:25 amRonald Reagan smashing the soviets and the Cold War.
Comment by m12 — July 8, 2007 @ 11:06 am
I think you mean Usama bin Laden and the cumulative effect of decades of moronic economic policy. Having a ringside seat for a boxing match doesn’t make you the winner at the end of the match.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:28 am“When was the last time a conservative president actually won a war anyway?”
“Ronald Reagan smashing the soviets and the Cold War.”
Yep, along with the Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, formation of NATO, The Berlin Airlift, forcing Khruschev to blink in Cuba, detente, SALT, the Helinksi Accords, the nuclear freeze movement, Pope John Paul II, Solidarity, Dual Track Decision, Aghanistan, Chernobyl, glastnost, perestroika, INF treaty, START, the independence movement in the Baltic, the failed coup by communist hardliners in 1991, the opening of the first McDonald’s in Moscow, and the US beating the Soviets in hockey in 1980.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:41 amI think m12 has posted enough cr*p today.
1) “the Goracle is no fan of the men and women who protect our society.”
2) “Kind of like John Kerry calling our troops stupid.”
3) “Why does the Goracle hate our Secret Service?”
4) “Ronald Reagan smashing the soviets and the Cold War.”
5) “Not at all. You have forgotten the Islamic invaders of 911.”
6) “I have to post it somewhere…”
7) “and its not like liberals would make a thread bashing any Democrat not named Joseph Lieberman.”
I unadulterated asshattery actually made intelligent, m12’s IQ would finally hover at around 60!
July 8th, 2007 at 11:56 amBest to pull the troops out as fast as possible now. Bush can resign and go into exile in Paraguay and take his dad with him.
July 8th, 2007 at 11:56 amYep, along with the Truman Doctrine, … and the US beating the Soviets in hockey in 1980.
Comment by Rick — July 8, 2007 @ 11:41 am
I think you are forgetting Sylvester Stallone beating Dolph Lundgren in Rocky IV! Truly this was the turning point in the Cold War!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:00 pm“Noted historian David McCoullough has indeed made the same comparison and concluded we would have LOST that war if we had the same media.”
You mean, Iraqis fought the American Revolution for our freedom? God, I had no idea. How sweet of them to sacrifice their lives so that we could be Americans and repay that debt by fighting their civil war for them now.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:07 pmDRAGOOOOO!!!!!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:08 pmHahahahah. What exactly were they invading? the afterlife? hahahah. WHat territory were they trying to invade? So I suppose Timothy Mc Veigh and his cohorts were the Christian invaders of (whatever date it was),,,right?
If it turns out Timothy McVeigh was part of a wider conspiracy, how do you suggest we should we respond to these invading christians militias?
You know where I can find that roster that lists all the members of Al-Queda so we can wipe them all out and declare victory??
No, the Islamic invaders who entered our nation in or before 2001.
The list of Al Qaeda is easy to find. It’s a simple subset of the list of Islamic people.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:09 pmLike many Americans, we have put off that conclusion…
This American came to that conclusion the moment BushCo starting beating the drums for ‘war’ in Iraq. The NYT dropped the ball just like all the main stream media.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:10 pmI agree with this article. to a point.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:17 pmWithdrawal of all US troops may not be the only solution. The auther describes, rightly, what may happen in this country were we to leave completely. The ramifications, though they may not be felt through-out the entire region, would certainly be very difficult in the next few years for the Iraqis themselves.
My simple contention is that the Iraqi people may not hate the troops themselves, rather what they are supporting; i.e. the creation of a long term occupation of their country by an outside force.
Were we to end our administrations pressure for the passage of the Hydrocarbon Law and forgo the construction of the 14 perminate bases there, and begin to step down the troop numbers and their patrols into civilian locations, then attacks on our troops would drop to almost nothing.
I think at that point, we would be a stablizing force in the reconstruction of the country. Less blood shed and civil strife would occure as a result.
Either way, leaving is the only just answer. Its just how thats in question.
Comment by m12 — July 8, 2007 @ 12:09 pm
Your posts have moved from idiotic to openly moronic.
19 hijackers = formidable invading force?
Carefully planned attacks = invasion?
What a ridiculous claim.
Not to mention: Iraq. had. nothing. to. do. with. 9/11.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:27 pmm12. In case you are a little confused… Iraq INVADED Kuwait
the United States INVADED Iraq some 12 years later.
They two had nothing to do with each other, but niether Al Qaeda nor Iraq INVADED the United States.
We were INVADED once in the 20th century and that was by Japan in Alaska.
We clear?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:35 pmPoor m12, when truth alludes him, he just makes sh!t up.
Like most of the trolls here as well as the comedian druggie rusher and the Faux NoNooz Krew!
At least he and his dwindling support group can all bask in their own distorted reality.
How sad (and lonely) their pitiful lives must be!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:38 pm“Kind of like John Kerry calling our troops stupid.
Comment by m12 — July 8, 2007 @ 10:45″
Yes, in that it didn’t happen.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:43 pmSo how exactly does the media “lose” a war?
I remember there was considerable criticism of the buildup during Desert Shield (I was in the Army at the time, at Fort Ord), and that turned out rather well.
There was criticism in the press during World War II, and that war wasn’t effected, either.
Much of the media’s criticism of the Vietnam War came after the rest of the country began to question the conflict.
The air campaign in Kosovo was also greatly scrutinized, and it had little impact on the outcome there.
Need the press on your side in order to win? Yeah, tell that to the Red Army veterans who fought in Afghanistan.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:56 pmWILLYLOMAN IS A NAME HIJACKER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Remember when you Lefties said that you disapproved of such things!
Well let’s see if you are true to your word!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment #127
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/08/conyers-impeachment/#comment-3918913
REMEMBER THIS WAYNE:
Anyone that does hijack a name usually gets imediate condemnation from the rest of the posters.
Comment by Wayne — July 3, 2007 @ 8:09 pm
YOU SAID IT HERE:
#237
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/03/political-appointees-given-new-regulatory-powers/
imediate condemnation for willyloman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 2:18 pmI think it’s a shame that the New York Times held off on this editorial until the Republicans in Congress began to distance themselves from Bush’s Iraq War policy. I guess the latest Republican defections gave them the courage to speak out. Liberal media indeed!
July 8th, 2007 at 4:19 pmIt is time for all major publications to come to the only choice we have left. To get all major combat forces out of Iraq. We can no longer win this war. We must set a deadline. Bush is deluding himself if he thinks he can win a civil war. If he had bothered to listen to the intelligence presented to him, he would have known that a civil war would have erupted the way it did. The president rushed to war. The president is responsible for this war the buck stops with him. The surge has failed. The only choice we have left is to leave. Majority Leader Reid was right. Under Bush and Cheney’s leadership or (lack thereof) we have lost this war. A majority of Americans in poll after poll are in favor of bring troops home. The president must listen to them.
July 8th, 2007 at 5:44 pmTh NYT sat on the domestic spying story until after Bush had inveigled a second term. Now, this cowardly excuse for a newspaper jumps on the out-of-Iraq bandwagon. Had the NYT boldly and courageously published its blockbuster of a story, would we have this monster sitting in the White House today? I think not.
July 8th, 2007 at 7:47 pm>No, the Islamic invaders who entered our nation in or before 2001.
Dude… when you invade something, your trying to take it over. PLease explain how people who are going to kill themselves occupy any territory?
And you didnt answer my question about the “chrisitian militia invasion”….
so people with hostile intentions are only invaders when they come from overseas, right?
>The list of Al Qaeda is easy to find.
who has it then? were do you find it?
> It’s a simple subset of the list of Islamic people.
Wow, gee, that narrows it down to about 1/4 the population of the world.. have any other insight to help guide our search genius???
July 8th, 2007 at 10:57 pmOf course, the New York Times will never acknowledge the full extent of their own complicity in this foolish war: their own cheerleading for the Bush administration and the war itself, and their publication of Judith Miller’s shoddy reporting.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:18 amOh, that fabricated nonsense again. Why does the Goracle hate our Secret Service?
Comment by m12 — July 8, 2007 @ 11:04 am
———————————————————————————
Two reasons:
1) The Goracle will do anything to get attention, even make sh!t up.
2) The Goracle is jealous of a real leader like President Bush.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:58 amGood thing we didn’t have the NYT editorial board during the American Revolution.
Comment by Jake — July 8, 2007 @ 10:37 am
————————————————————————————-
You got that right Jake.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:59 am