Wednesday, July 06, 2005
Iraq and the Withdrawal Idiots
The Job is Not Over
We are erecting a large home in Iraq for its citizens. It may be that we will need to have several wings in the house, plus a main structure that combines all of the central functions of the home.
The design of the house is not complete; as yet there is no master plan, but enough is specified to begin building the main part and some of the wings. The Iraqi are creating the plan now.
Hurricanes and tornadoes are a major menace to the house. They sweep in unpredictably and cause damage to the area, and sometimes death. We are busy erecting dampers and windbreaks against these events as fast as we can, and the Iraqi themselves are helping more and more.
The house is being built to withstand such potentially disastrous occurrences, by going deep into bedrock to anchor the foundations, and using pleasing curves in the outer walls and roof to deflect the winds from the West. Modern services are being built also, such as pure running water, sewage disposal, net power, driveways, heat and air conditioning, telephone and TV, and access roads and driveways.
The local police have been bolstered to ensure better protection from thieves in the day and night, and the fire department has been given new equipment to fight fires rapidly and effectively. A local hospital has been built and equipped with the latest of medical marvels to save lives from the ravages of life. Schools have been built to care for the education of the children in this newest of homes for democracy.
The Iraqi have been incorporated more and more into the home from the start, and many of them are using their skills and experience to help build the house, while others are going through training to man the posts created by the Iraqi house management, and its protection forces, as well as the economy surrounding and pervading the house.
It is a huge job, and it is not finished. The 26 million Iraqis just beginning to realize the true significance of their new home, new management, new responsibilities and new opportunities. The hurricanes and tornadoes are still raging and knocking down partial structures here and there, but they grow weaker by the day, as the Iraqi themselves take hold of their fate and erect preventative measures.
We have made a commitment to stay the course, to help them finish their new home, and to teach them how to defend it well. It will be a true testament to the many lives lost while pursuing this dream of a home for democracy in Iraq, and in constructing and finishing this new, relatively safe home for millions of Iraqi. Any step less would be criminal.
There are those who insist on a date for our withdrawal from Iraq. Such a mindset not only dishonors our lost men and treasure in this noble enterprise, and all of the losses of the Iraqi themselves, but it also threatens the Iraqi with a return to their former subjugation and poverty, with their partially built home destroyed by the hurricanes and tornadoes. Further, it would embolden others to create more hurricanes and tornadoes to destroy things in their path all over the world, since we will have proven that we cannot stay the course. I would be ashamed for my country to do such a craven and cowardly thing.
We will stay the course.
Comments:
<< Home
Whatever your personal beliefs about the Iraqi War, it would be criminal to cut and run now before the new government was fully on its feet and able to deal with the terrorists for themselves. It would be idiotic in the extreme, IMO. And downright cowardly, too.
Ask yourself a series of "and then what would happen?" (ATW) questions:
We stop fighting and begin to withdraw. ATW?
Some alternative you think up. ATW?
Etc.
You will find that the most likely scenario is a bloody insurrection between Sunnis and the new government. ATW?
If the Sunnis win, the Iraqi are back to square one, but now with Sunnis determined to stop Shi'ite resistence once and for all. Genocide, perhaps? ATW?
Is this what we want?
Ask yourself a series of "and then what would happen?" (ATW) questions:
We stop fighting and begin to withdraw. ATW?
Some alternative you think up. ATW?
Etc.
You will find that the most likely scenario is a bloody insurrection between Sunnis and the new government. ATW?
If the Sunnis win, the Iraqi are back to square one, but now with Sunnis determined to stop Shi'ite resistence once and for all. Genocide, perhaps? ATW?
Is this what we want?
If the Sunnis win, the Iraqi are back to square one, but now with Sunnis determined to stop Shi'ite resistance once and for all. Genocide, perhaps? ATW?
The war on terror in Iraq put the Bush administration on a defensive case. In a near future I don't think that all these efforts will pay off if they fail to integrate the Sunnis to the new government but it will allow Iran to have more political influence in the region: Iran within the next few months is going to train the Iraqi police. All that I see is a stretched thinn political margin whose nobody has control over it in the next few years, and if they do, then it's not a democracy anymore.
The exit strategy is important, and a honorable one not because they are going to send the wrong message to the terrorists but for restablishing the image of the US like it was before 911.
A country cannot be free if people have to be liberated from something and not for something. It is their unique choices.
...etc
The US should have never gone to war in Iraq, not without international laws or support from the allies, if ever these allies still exist.
The war on terror in Iraq put the Bush administration on a defensive case. In a near future I don't think that all these efforts will pay off if they fail to integrate the Sunnis to the new government but it will allow Iran to have more political influence in the region: Iran within the next few months is going to train the Iraqi police. All that I see is a stretched thinn political margin whose nobody has control over it in the next few years, and if they do, then it's not a democracy anymore.
The exit strategy is important, and a honorable one not because they are going to send the wrong message to the terrorists but for restablishing the image of the US like it was before 911.
A country cannot be free if people have to be liberated from something and not for something. It is their unique choices.
...etc
The US should have never gone to war in Iraq, not without international laws or support from the allies, if ever these allies still exist.
It seems like somebody else is exploiting the war on terror for their own aims:
MOSCOW, July 8 (RIA Novosti) - The timeframe for the deployment of the antiterrorist coalition bases in Central Asian countries should be determined to maintain effective cooperation in the fight against terrorism, a prominent member of the lower chamber of the Russian parliament said Friday.
Konstantin Kosachev, the chairman of the State Duma's foreign affairs committee, said the request made by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which unites five Eurasian states and China, for the coalition to define the timeframe of the deployment was not an ultimatum.
Kosachev said there was simply a question without an answer. "The longer the uncertainty remains, the more reasons there will be for suspicion."
"This issue was raised in order to maintain interaction in a crucial sphere for us - the fight against terrorism," he said.
MOSCOW, July 8 (RIA Novosti) - The timeframe for the deployment of the antiterrorist coalition bases in Central Asian countries should be determined to maintain effective cooperation in the fight against terrorism, a prominent member of the lower chamber of the Russian parliament said Friday.
Konstantin Kosachev, the chairman of the State Duma's foreign affairs committee, said the request made by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which unites five Eurasian states and China, for the coalition to define the timeframe of the deployment was not an ultimatum.
Kosachev said there was simply a question without an answer. "The longer the uncertainty remains, the more reasons there will be for suspicion."
"This issue was raised in order to maintain interaction in a crucial sphere for us - the fight against terrorism," he said.
UT, we have 74 nations with us in Iraq. some are symbolic only, but that is fine, since we don't want to alter our command and control systems to accomodate them.
That France, Russia and China are against the war has much more to do with their loss of oil contracts and business in Iraq than any presupposed hatred of Bush and America, together with their deep philosophical and political systems (mainly communism) that are in direct conflict with the US.
>>>The US should have never gone to war in Iraq, not without international laws or support from the allies, if ever these allies still exist. <<<
Truly nonsense. We have all the law on our side that we need. And, as for our supposed allies, forget it. They are a lost cause: they are fickle, they are self-serving, and they are anti-US in the bargain.
Even more nations signing up as Germany has finally done, sort of, is not going to make things better in any sense. We have all of the moral support we need.
Tell me, what happens when we withdraw our troops, aircraft, tanks, and missiles from Europe?
That France, Russia and China are against the war has much more to do with their loss of oil contracts and business in Iraq than any presupposed hatred of Bush and America, together with their deep philosophical and political systems (mainly communism) that are in direct conflict with the US.
>>>The US should have never gone to war in Iraq, not without international laws or support from the allies, if ever these allies still exist. <<<
Truly nonsense. We have all the law on our side that we need. And, as for our supposed allies, forget it. They are a lost cause: they are fickle, they are self-serving, and they are anti-US in the bargain.
Even more nations signing up as Germany has finally done, sort of, is not going to make things better in any sense. We have all of the moral support we need.
Tell me, what happens when we withdraw our troops, aircraft, tanks, and missiles from Europe?
That France, Russia and China are against the war has much more to do with their loss of oil contracts and business in Iraq than any presupposed hatred of Bush and America It's wrong. France is not dependent from oil resources in Iraq, they do business with Russia. The main controler of oil resources is Russia for the european continent which gives strategic alliances. Whether it was a good idea or not, I think it was a bad idea and oil is stronger than morality. I guess Europe is trying to affirm its sovereignity and NATO is still in Europe. Like I told you before things may change after 2007. If ever they were going to help the US in Iraq, it does not mean I would even agree with them.
We may have 74 countries with us (not really sure of this number) but it represents hardly one fourth of the Earth. I call that megalomania.
If you withdraw the NATO from Europe, I guess lots of people are going to ba happy because these people see the US as an Empire.
We may have 74 countries with us (not really sure of this number) but it represents hardly one fourth of the Earth. I call that megalomania.
If you withdraw the NATO from Europe, I guess lots of people are going to ba happy because these people see the US as an Empire.
Intelligent people know that we do not have an empire, and do not want an empire. Propaganda has taken over here and portrayed us in a light we don't want. NATO was a common cause development between the US and the members, and not remotely an empire-effort. What we are conflicting over is the Socialist worldview versus the American Worldview, and socialist capabilities versus American capabilities. Media have been biased to show the US in a bad light for years now. I saw it in Paris and London last year.
It makes people mad that they don't match up -- not even close -- they are helpless to impose their will against ours. The UN couldn't stop us, the Russians and French and Chnese couldn't stop us.No one could.
We still have Spain and Germany doing tasks in the area.
74 give or take a few, I heard 80 the other day, but can't confirm it, is nearly half, but why should anyone care what that number is? It is powerful enough to get the job done. If it were all but three, it would still be meaningless to the effort. And to suppose it should be a majority is senseless.We would be doing it even if we had none or one
It is perhaps painfully true, but France is a bit player on the scene, but wants to play a foiler role on us. They should mind the borders of France, and play football.
Russia is about oil too. I don't trust Putin. He is a weasel.
If the progress we have made keeps up, and there are no major glitches, Iraq will be relatively pacified by sometime next year, and growing into it new suit of government clothes, and military powers.
The US will be consolidating at its bases there, and getting stocked up on precision weapons and blockbusters, building better facilities and airfields, roads, and water plants.
It makes people mad that they don't match up -- not even close -- they are helpless to impose their will against ours. The UN couldn't stop us, the Russians and French and Chnese couldn't stop us.No one could.
We still have Spain and Germany doing tasks in the area.
74 give or take a few, I heard 80 the other day, but can't confirm it, is nearly half, but why should anyone care what that number is? It is powerful enough to get the job done. If it were all but three, it would still be meaningless to the effort. And to suppose it should be a majority is senseless.We would be doing it even if we had none or one
It is perhaps painfully true, but France is a bit player on the scene, but wants to play a foiler role on us. They should mind the borders of France, and play football.
Russia is about oil too. I don't trust Putin. He is a weasel.
If the progress we have made keeps up, and there are no major glitches, Iraq will be relatively pacified by sometime next year, and growing into it new suit of government clothes, and military powers.
The US will be consolidating at its bases there, and getting stocked up on precision weapons and blockbusters, building better facilities and airfields, roads, and water plants.
LOL you make me laugh. I mean .... anyone that can recomfort your thoughts is welcome and if they can't then they are damned. Then you call them socialist, or communist or anti-american, because you think that these people reflect the policy against your Bush. And you are like "Hey don't touch my Bush!" because anything that touches your Idol touches you as well. Well Bush is not really my Idol, nor is Chirac, nor is anyone; for once I think therefore I am. You know that it cannot be good 100% in life like it cannot be 100% evil. The one who thinks he can be perfect should be called God.
I don't know what happened in Paris or London since the last 6 years. Usually the french leftists are more pro-american than the english journalists from the Guardian. It means that the french leftists, that are called socialist by you are pro-american while the french conservators (in Europe they are called liberal, because their ideas are from the right-center) are anti-american. Chirac is a republican, yet he does not get along with Bush. It's not even about politics, it is all about how you feel towards any President that controls the people. In Europe soccer is good, because you play with your head and your feet unlike football. In the US they don't see why they would play with their feet instead of their hands. It's just a difference of concept.
Well I don't care if you want the US to build bases over there, that's just your opinion; I think this war on terror is going to be used by other people, people that are worse than the Bush administration, and I have some issues with that.
Anyway take care man.
I don't know what happened in Paris or London since the last 6 years. Usually the french leftists are more pro-american than the english journalists from the Guardian. It means that the french leftists, that are called socialist by you are pro-american while the french conservators (in Europe they are called liberal, because their ideas are from the right-center) are anti-american. Chirac is a republican, yet he does not get along with Bush. It's not even about politics, it is all about how you feel towards any President that controls the people. In Europe soccer is good, because you play with your head and your feet unlike football. In the US they don't see why they would play with their feet instead of their hands. It's just a difference of concept.
Well I don't care if you want the US to build bases over there, that's just your opinion; I think this war on terror is going to be used by other people, people that are worse than the Bush administration, and I have some issues with that.
Anyway take care man.
By the way Israel sold for more than 2.5 billion dollars in weapons to China for the year 2004.
Europe did not sell anything to China
Tada
Europe did not sell anything to China
Tada
Well, regarding NATO, the military seems to want it to stay and grow as a buffer between Europe and Russia. The Administration and Congress may well try to keep it alive for the moment, but it is a dead idea, IMO.
When the public realizes what the EU is trying to do, the US citizens will demand that we pull out of NATO, and let them pay for their own damn defenses. That will be another 2 to 4% of their budget dedicated to defense for a while.
We had to lean on Europe to get them to stop their push to sell military items to China, just as we leaned on Israel a month or so ago.
You are right about my use of socialism/communism/humanism as a flail against actions and words that speak of policies supporting those causes, whether or not the individuals are actually one or the other or none of them. Or I use Islam/Muslims: those of that sect who commit acts of terror and fight against the US.
The simple truth is that if you fight against the US, terrorize the US citizenry, or demonstrate against the US, or speak and write against the US, or disrespect the US in a disgusting manner, then you become the enemy of the US as far as I am concerned. You will have by those acts given aid and comfort to the enemies of the US.
This has little or nothing to do with Bush; it has everything to do with creating an unwholesome, negative climate of opinion against my country.
If you have complaints about things, then use the system to gain redress, if you can. I have no use for people who bitterly complain without doing anything positive to fix any problem they have or perceive. Whiners and ranters who do not add to the general good, but rather, try to tear it down, and discourage others from doing anything positive, are loathesome critters, don't you agree? Especially in wartime.
I was reading Kissenger's book the other day about Nam. For two years after the truce, the Nixon Administration tried to fund the defense of the South, but the Congress stopped all support. The result was the NK, well-supplied by China and Russia, rolled in and took over. Most of us who went through that war do not want the outcome to be much the same in Iraq.
Such shortsightedness cost millions their lives in Laos, Cambodia, and Nam.
The reason for the stoppage? Idiots and communist-thinking people that fought and demonstrated against that war, making the Congress afraid to see the war through to victory. Along with some real fools at the controls, such as LBJ, and Robert McNamarra.
Oh Well! History!
When the public realizes what the EU is trying to do, the US citizens will demand that we pull out of NATO, and let them pay for their own damn defenses. That will be another 2 to 4% of their budget dedicated to defense for a while.
We had to lean on Europe to get them to stop their push to sell military items to China, just as we leaned on Israel a month or so ago.
You are right about my use of socialism/communism/humanism as a flail against actions and words that speak of policies supporting those causes, whether or not the individuals are actually one or the other or none of them. Or I use Islam/Muslims: those of that sect who commit acts of terror and fight against the US.
The simple truth is that if you fight against the US, terrorize the US citizenry, or demonstrate against the US, or speak and write against the US, or disrespect the US in a disgusting manner, then you become the enemy of the US as far as I am concerned. You will have by those acts given aid and comfort to the enemies of the US.
This has little or nothing to do with Bush; it has everything to do with creating an unwholesome, negative climate of opinion against my country.
If you have complaints about things, then use the system to gain redress, if you can. I have no use for people who bitterly complain without doing anything positive to fix any problem they have or perceive. Whiners and ranters who do not add to the general good, but rather, try to tear it down, and discourage others from doing anything positive, are loathesome critters, don't you agree? Especially in wartime.
I was reading Kissenger's book the other day about Nam. For two years after the truce, the Nixon Administration tried to fund the defense of the South, but the Congress stopped all support. The result was the NK, well-supplied by China and Russia, rolled in and took over. Most of us who went through that war do not want the outcome to be much the same in Iraq.
Such shortsightedness cost millions their lives in Laos, Cambodia, and Nam.
The reason for the stoppage? Idiots and communist-thinking people that fought and demonstrated against that war, making the Congress afraid to see the war through to victory. Along with some real fools at the controls, such as LBJ, and Robert McNamarra.
Oh Well! History!
In regards with the last events in central Asia (the presidential elections in Khrygystan were watched under russian and american supervision), Karimov called China to save his ass, and Kazakhstan signed oil contracts with India and China, the sino-russian alliance whose next military cooperation starts next month is willing to consolidate their influence in the region, and within a few weeks there are going to be diplomatical frictions.
I don't think it is in the interests of Europeans to give up on NATO, although some pro-europeans think otherwise, it would be a catastrophe. It is going to be more like a balance of powers on the globe but like always Europe is going to be in the middle of it (lifting the chinese embargo? Not since the SCO is back on tracks). I don't trust Russia and China, they do not even care about democracies or their people, and despite their own war on terror, they might use the djihadists on their side in Central Asia. The Russians did not appreciate that they lost their satellites states (Ukraine...etc). Also technologically they are developping new military projects (tanks, guns, missiles...etc)
From what I understand there may be a partial pullout from Iraq and the documents have been leaked to the public. It started in India then in the UK. We'll see what happens.
A top-secret paper written by British Defence Secretary John Reid for Prime Minister Tony Blair reveals many of the 8500 British troops in Iraq are likely to be brought home within three months.
Most of the rest would return six months later.
The leaked document appears to fly in the face of Mr Blair and President Bush's pledges that allied forces will not withdraw until Iraqi forces are strong enough to take control of security.
The memo, revealed in The Mail on Sunday newspaper, says other international forces under British control will have to be handled carefully if Britain withdraws.
They may also leave Iraq, fearing they will no longer be safe.
Embarrassingly, the document says US authorities are split over the plan. It also suggests one of the reasons for getting British troops out is to save money.
http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1268&storyid=3421461
I don't think it is in the interests of Europeans to give up on NATO, although some pro-europeans think otherwise, it would be a catastrophe. It is going to be more like a balance of powers on the globe but like always Europe is going to be in the middle of it (lifting the chinese embargo? Not since the SCO is back on tracks). I don't trust Russia and China, they do not even care about democracies or their people, and despite their own war on terror, they might use the djihadists on their side in Central Asia. The Russians did not appreciate that they lost their satellites states (Ukraine...etc). Also technologically they are developping new military projects (tanks, guns, missiles...etc)
From what I understand there may be a partial pullout from Iraq and the documents have been leaked to the public. It started in India then in the UK. We'll see what happens.
A top-secret paper written by British Defence Secretary John Reid for Prime Minister Tony Blair reveals many of the 8500 British troops in Iraq are likely to be brought home within three months.
Most of the rest would return six months later.
The leaked document appears to fly in the face of Mr Blair and President Bush's pledges that allied forces will not withdraw until Iraqi forces are strong enough to take control of security.
The memo, revealed in The Mail on Sunday newspaper, says other international forces under British control will have to be handled carefully if Britain withdraws.
They may also leave Iraq, fearing they will no longer be safe.
Embarrassingly, the document says US authorities are split over the plan. It also suggests one of the reasons for getting British troops out is to save money.
http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1268&storyid=3421461
<< Home
Post a Comment