There's One Possible Way to Win in Iraq, Should We Do It?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

21,500 troops for limited deployment won't do it but there is one possible way to gain control of that country.

It should have been done from the beginning but it still may work. Putting 500,000 troops in that country will effectively control all borders, fill voids left by troops moving on after clearing operations and gain control of all major cities.

There is some upside to doing this. Of course, we don't have the military personnel to do this currently as they have already been exhausted through multiple tours in Iraq, so the draft would have to be instituted. This would give almost every American a sense of actually being involved in a war that we don't have now instead of just watching the same troops pull tour after tour from the sidelines.

Logistics and support for the added troops would require another 800,000 to 1 million troops so a large percentage of young Americans would get a chance to do their part in Iraq for the country.

Costs to American taxpayers would probably at least triple or more to over a half a trillion a year but that is part of war.

This is probably the only possible way to "win" the war In Iraq.

Should we do it?

[Garcia Bronco]

Maybe we should, but there would be no support for it.

[Antilles]

I smell a set-up...

[-Slap-]

I smell a set-up...

:~ohyah!:

[BroncoMatt]

I'd rather just turn Iraq into the world's largest sheet of glass

[chawknz]

I'd rather just turn Iraq into the world's largest sheet of glass

That's what I thought of when I read the subject about having one possible way to win.

[Steve Sewell]

Hell no.

Not only do I disagree with it, do you really think a politician would vote in favor of not only raising taxes but instituting a draft? Those are two of the most unpopular things a politician could do.

And besides...there's literally millions of young Iraqi's that we could train to fight for their own damn freedom. Why send half a million of our young men?

[Hotrod]

Ha!

[sirhcyennek81]

Problem is Baghdad, so, put more troops where the issue is. I dont think drafting a million more troops that wont be ready until 2008 is the answer. More I think about it the more I think Iraq should be cut into thirds, the Kurds in northern Iraq already act like a seprate country, might as well make it official.


:Broncos:

[Hotrod]

Hell no.

Not only do I disagree with it, do you really think a politician would vote in favor of not only raising taxes but instituting a draft? Those are two of the most unpopular things a politician could do.

Actually some have already proposed such bills.....of course they have been defeated.

[Hotrod]

Problem is Baghdad, so, put more troops where the issue is. I dont think drafting a million more troops that wont be ready until 2008 is the answer. More I think about it the more I think Iraq should be cut into thirds, the Kurds in northern Iraq already act like a seprate country, might as well make it official.


:Broncos:

Just a few quick things. The borders are the real problem not just the capital. Iran is fueling this war and laughing right in our faces.

Turkey would quickly invade northern Iraq.

[-Slap-]

Can't we just send Bruschi with a cueball in a sock?

[Antilles]

Can't we just send Bruschi with a cueball in a sock?

Sorry Slap, but someone already proposed the "sheet of glass" solution.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Hell no.
Not only do I disagree with it, do you really think a politician would vote in favor of not only raising taxes but instituting a draft? Those are two of the most unpopular things a politician could do.
And besides...there's literally millions of young Iraqi's that we could train to fight for their own damn freedom. Why send half a million of our young men?That's the problem, the Iraqis aren't stepping up to the plate. A report came out yesterday saying we might have screwed up in training them and they need to be retrained. It'll probably take a few years at least to do this right. So in order to get them to the point to take control of their own country shouldn't we finish what we started?

[RhymesayersDU]

Can't we just send Bruschi with a cueball in a sock?

Only if he's flanked by Chuck Norris & Jay Cutler.

[sirhcyennek81]

Just a few quick things. The borders are the real problem not just the capital. Iran is fueling this war and laughing right in our faces.

Turkey would quickly invade northern Iraq.


Do you think the political will exists in the US to go to war with Iran if actions on the ground in Iraq warrants it?


:Broncos:

[ant1999e]

At first, I was impressed a solution (one hasn't been put up yet)was being given by a liberal. Should have known better.

[Bronco Bob]

Do you think the political will exists in the US to go to war with Iran if actions on the ground in Iraq warrants it?


That makes no sense. Most of the Americans are being killed by Sunnis,
supported by Saudi Arabia and other Sunni countries. If Iran didn't
exist, nothing would change in Iraq. It would be an even worse disaster
for the US to start a third war, especially with a country as well armed
and motivated as Iran.

[Rohirrim]

Damn! I must have been out of touch. I thought we already won?
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/media/bush-mission-accomplished.jpg

[Hotrod]

Do you think the political will exists in the US to go to war with Iran if actions on the ground in Iraq warrants it?


:Broncos:

Nope thats one of the problems. We are in a position to have our strings pulled and cant really do **** about it. Then again would I be surprised if I wake up tomarrow and we've bombed the crap out of Iran....no not at all.

They have now commited an act of war against American and our hands are fairly well tied behind our backs at the present time.

[Rohirrim]

That makes no sense. Most of the Americans are being killed by Sunnis,
supported by Saudi Arabia and other Sunni countries. If Iran didn't
exist, nothing would change in Iraq. It would be an even worse disaster
for the US to start a third war, especially with a country as well armed
and motivated as Iran.

The Sunnis are behind the majority of the attacks against us, and yet the Bush cabal keeps trying to tell the American people that Iran is behind the attacks? Odd, isn't it?

[TheDave]

hand out more soccerballs... that should do it :)

[Hotrod]

That makes no sense. Most of the Americans are being killed by Sunnis,
supported by Saudi Arabia and other Sunni countries. If Iran didn't
exist, nothing would change in Iraq. It would be an even worse disaster
for the US to start a third war, especially with a country as well armed
and motivated as Iran.

Actually this is incorrect. Iran is pulling the strings of the Iraqi terrorists/insurgents. They are supplying not only arms/IED's but tech assistance and planning.

[Bronco Bob]

Nope thats one of the problems. We are in a position to have our strings pulled and cant really do **** about it. Then again would I be surprised if I wake up tomarrow and we've bombed the crap out of Iran....no not at all.

They have now commited an act of war against American and our hands are fairly well tied behind our backs at the present time.

I must have missed that one. Just exactly what did Iran do?

[Hotrod]

The Sunnis are behind the majority of the attacks against us, and yet the Bush cabal keeps trying to tell the American people that Iran is behind the attacks? Odd, isn't it?

Iran is very much behind the attacks.

[Hotrod]

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=52626

[Bronco Bob]

Actually this is incorrect. Iran is pulling the strings of the Iraqi terrorists/insurgents. They are supplying not only arms/IED's but tech assistance and planning.

A lot more Shias are being killed by Sunnis than Americans are being killed
by either one. Are you trying to say the Iranians are supplying weapons
to the Sunnis to kill fellow Shias? Again that makes no sense. Most of
the aid for the Sunni insurgents is coming from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and
other Sunni countries. A lot of the outside fighters are also coming
from these countries. Very few Americans are dying in Shia held areas
of Iraq. Most Americans are dying in the Sunni held areas such as Anbar.

[Tom H.]

I like the idea of giving the people of Iraq more work and import fewer goods to their country. That would give them the opportunity to rebuild their own cities. It would also help to move the target away from making war to something beneficial.

I also like the idea of giving Bush more uplifting work and export his war mongering ideas. That will actually benefit our country.

[Hotrod]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/31/iraq.main/index.html

Iraq's prime minister said Wednesday he's sure Iran is behind some attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and he won't allow his country to be a battleground for the two nations.

"We have told the Iranians and the Americans, 'We know that you have a problem with each other, but we are asking you, please solve your problems outside Iraq,' " Nuri al-Maliki told CNN.

"We will not accept Iran to use Iraq to attack the American forces," al-Maliki said Wednesday in an exclusive interview with CNN. (Read more of al-Maliki interview)

"We don't want the American forces to take Iraq as a field to attack Iran or Syria," he added.

Asked about the role of Iran in Iraq, al-Maliki said he was confident that Iranian influence was behind attacks on U.S. forces. "It exists, and I assure you it exists," he said.
Iranian-U.S. tensions have been ratcheted up recently, with two U.S. officials theorizing about the possibility that Iran was involved in a January 20 attack that killed five U.S. soldiers.

Two officials from separate U.S. government agencies said Tuesday the Pentagon is investigating whether the attack on a military compound in Karbala was carried out by Iranians or Iranian-trained operatives.

"People are looking at it seriously," one of the officials said, adding that the Iranian connection was a leading theory in the investigation.

[Hotrod]

A lot more Shias are being killed by Sunnis than Americans are being killed
by either one. Are you trying to say the Iranians are supplying weapons
to the Sunnis to kill fellow Shias? Again that makes no sense. Most of
the aid for the Sunni insurgents is coming from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and
other Sunni countries. A lot of the outside fighters are also coming
from these countries. Very few Americans are dying in Shia held areas
of Iraq. Most Americans are dying in the Sunni held areas such as Anbar.

Do you think the leadership of Iran gives a damn about any of the insurgents in Iraq? Or is this a great way to keep "the great satan" bogged down while building itself into a regional powerhouse?

We are distracted thats great for Chavez/N Korea/Iran/Syria

[Hotrod]

hand out more soccerballs... that should do it :)

I think some pot to help mellow these people out would go along way ;D

[freak6]

Exxon posted record profits for 06, most of any U.S. company at that.

WTF are you people complaining about! Damn libs!

We've only lost 3200 lives in 4 years of war. Toughen up! Invest! We haven't been hit in 4 years.

Viva La Bush!

[Bronco Bob]

We heard all this BS as justification for invading Iraq, and now we are to
believe what the government says about Iran. PT Barnum comes to mind.

[bendog]

A lot more Shias are being killed by Sunnis than Americans are being killed
by either one. Are you trying to say the Iranians are supplying weapons
to the Sunnis to kill fellow Shias? Again that makes no sense. Most of
the aid for the Sunni insurgents is coming from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and
other Sunni countries. A lot of the outside fighters are also coming
from these countries. Very few Americans are dying in Shia held areas
of Iraq. Most Americans are dying in the Sunni held areas such as Anbar.

That's my understanding too. HOWEVER, Iran may well be involved in sponsoring the shiia death squads that abduct sunnis, torture them with electric drills and then shoot them. The fact simply is that some of the shiia don't want a govt including the sunnis, and some of those folks are inside the Iraqi "govt," and all-ah-mucky may be one of them, but for sure he isn't doing anything to stop it.

We could put in a million troops, but so long as the shiaa killers are in the govt, we cannot solve the violence. It's down the ****ter. Or the troops are stuck swimming in the ****ter.

[Bronco Bob]

Do you think the leadership of Iran gives a damn about any of the insurgents in Iraq? Or is this a great way to keep "the great satan" bogged down while building itself into a regional powerhouse?




Do you have any independent proof of this, or are you just willingly swallowing
the Bushco spin?

[Florida_Bronco]

You're looking at generations before the Iraqi people are capable of running that country on their own. The average Iraqi male has the equivalent of a 3rd grade education, and that's not going to cut it when it comes to running a country.

Iraq is headed in the right direction I believe, but we are going to be there for a long, long time.

[sirhcyennek81]

Good thing this thread is bursting with actual solutions instead of the petty partisan back biting that has occured the last 7 years...


:Broncos:

[Hotrod]

We heard all this BS as justification for invading Iraq, and now we are to
believe what the government says about Iran. PT Barnum comes to mind.

I agree that the government has very little cred but it does make sense. For the record Im in no way advocating opening another front at this time.

[Hotrod]

Do you have any independent proof of this, or are you just willingly swallowing
the Bushco spin?

LOL thats really not much of an argument on your part.

I would say the Iraqi minister/CNN (which is anti Bush)/Yahoo/Fox News etc are fairly independant sources no???

[Bronco_Beerslug]

At first, I was impressed a solution (one hasn't been put up yet)was being given by a liberal. Should have known better.I'm not a liberal but what does it matter where a "solution" comes from and what don't you like about my idea?

Are there better "solutions" being offered somewhere?

[Bronco Bob]

LOL thats really not much of an argument on your part.

I would say the Iraqi minister/CNN (which is anti Bush)/Yahoo/Fox News etc are fairly independant sources no???

I was with you until you cited Fox Noise, er Fox News, as an independent source. :rofl:

[Hotrod]

I was with you until you cited Fox Noise, er Fox News, as an independent source. :rofl:

So because fox news (right leaning no doubt) is one of dozens of news agencys reporting the "suspected" Iranian link the whole idea gets **** canned?

[Hotrod]

You and I have hijacked this thread enough Im personally gonna move along and let the thread get back on track.

[sirhcyennek81]

I was with you until you cited Fox Noise, er Fox News, as an independent source. :rofl:


Kind of amusing, he cited cnn, msnbc, nbc, cbs, abc, ect and that doesnt make you think its noise, but he cites foxnews and you start to laugh. One conservative news service out of 6+, and you think it lacks credibility.


:Broncos:

[Hotrod]

Just one more food for thought.

If/When we leave Iraq there is a very real possibility that Iraq becomes Irans Lebennon = a problem.

[freak6]

Kind of amusing, he cited cnn, msnbc, nbc, cbs, abc, ect and that doesnt make you think its noise, but he cites foxnews and you start to laugh. One conservative news service out of 6+, and you think it lacks credibility.


:Broncos:

abc is right wing.

[24champ]

abc is right wing.

yeah George Stephanopoulos is a huge right wing nut...lmfao.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Just one more food for thought.

If/When we leave Iraq there is a very real possibility that Iraq becomes Irans Lebennon = a problem.So, do you have any ideas on how to win in Iraq? Or do we just stay there until hopefully one day the Iraqis make up and decide to get along together so we can go home?

[Meck77]

This whole mess began when Iraq started launching scuds at Israel. What has their role been? I know Iraq and Israel aren't allies but they are neighbors. Surely they could get involved atleast financially. Granted we pay their bills anyway but why aren't they stepping up to do anything?

I doubt Israeli troops would be too well received there but it's not like we are. They are trying to blow our guys to bits at every turn anyhow.

I think Isreal needs to committ a few billion dollars and the 20,000 troops. They rolled into Lebannon and pulled back without any major escalation in the region. I was actually surprised by this to be honest but they got out.

Am I alone here?

Who was really threatened by Saddam in the first place? Think about it people. Was it the USA or Iraq's neighbors that he was directly attacking?

[Rohirrim]

So, do you have any ideas on how to win in Iraq? Or do we just stay there until hopefully one day the Iraqis make up and decide to get along together so we can go home?

Wrong question based on the wrong premise. Here's what we need to do: First, we convince the American people that we've won in Iraq. A photo op between Maliki and Bush, standing in front of a "Victory is Ours!" sign ought to do it. Then, we bring home all the troops and hold parades all across the country. Hell, Rove could handle this job in his sleep.

[sirhcyennek81]

abc is right wing.


As compared to Pravda?


:Broncos:

[freak6]

I doubt Israeli troops would be too well received there but it's not like we are. They are trying to blow our guys to bits at every turn anyhow.

I think Isreal needs to committ a few billion dollars and the 20,000 troops. They rolled into Lebannon and pulled back without any major escalation in the region. I was actually surprised by this to be honest but they got out.

Am I alone here?


lol!

You really do want to see WW3 huh!

"Send in the Jews!"

bwaa ha ha haaaaa

I'd pay for the next MAC flight out of Pendleton and get the hell of this boring Recruit Depot in a second to see that fight.

[Hotrod]

So, do you have any ideas on how to win in Iraq? Or do we just stay there until hopefully one day the Iraqis make up and decide to get along together so we can go home?

Nope not a single answer. I'm to the point now where unless someone comes up with something fast or something changes for the better were just waiting for the inevitable pull out. Things will get much worse long before the get better that Im sure of.

We certainly have the finest fighting force in the world. I fault the political leaders (both sides of the aisle). The lack of planning and understanding of the enemy along with a serious lack of end of war statagy has put us where we are today IMO

I dont think that most Americans really understand the world outside of our borders. There is most certainly a lack of understanding of other cultures/religions etc. We ultimatly underestimated our enemys and possible most importantly underestimated the power of religion in the ME

[Jetmeck]

Turn that country into a mirror if you get my meaning, otherwise that ****hole country is not worth another AMERICAN life.

[Hotrod]

Wrong question based on the wrong premise. Here's what we need to do: First, we convince the American people that we've won in Iraq. A photo op between Maliki and Bush, standing in front of a "Victory is Ours!" sign ought to do it. Then, we bring home all the troops and hold parades all across the country. Hell, Rove could handle this job in his sleep.

Sad yet true.

[Hotrod]

Sorry Steve but bringing troops from Israel would be the single worst thing that we could do.

[Meck77]

lol!

You really do want to see WW3 huh!

"Send in the Jews!"

bwaa ha ha haaaaa

I'd pay for the next MAC flight out of Pendleton and get the hell of this boring Recruit Depot in a second to see that fight.

Where do you think the epa center for WWIII is anyway? It's been the holy land and we all know this and so do they.

If my neighbors have to die protecting Israel than I feel they should be right beside them.

Why should we handle the dirty work alone Freak? We are in a world war so to speak. There are war fronts all over the globe.

What point are you trying to make about WWIII?

Israel rolled in Lebannon and killed plenty of people without any retaliation.

[freak6]

I fault the political leaders <b>(both sides of the aisle). </b>Ok, so who was responsible for the planning? Who ignored Gen. Sinseki and the many other Gens that said we need 250k troops? Who is the Commander in Chief? Who is thE Decider?

The lack of planning and understanding of the enemy along with a serious lack of end of war statagy has put us where we are today IMO


All the Democrats did was authorize the President to use our military to stop Saddam from building up his army, and using the WMDs that BUSH AND CO. lied about him having, preying on the fear of the U.S. citizens post 9/11 to get rich by going to war with Iraq.

Here is a link showing Saddam was no threat pre 9/11.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-rice-wmd.wmv

Meanwhile Exxon is posting record profits for the 2nd year in a row, and Haliburton got every no bid contract it wanted in Iraq thanks to its former CEO being is a small position of power in the Whitehouse,the Vice President.

Nice try Hotrod, but this war is all on Bush and Neo-cons stupid fks that lied to get us in, and just like thier resume predicted, mis-managed it like the dumbfks that they are.

[Hotrod]

Ok, so who was responsible for the planning? Who ignored Gen. Sinseki and the many other Gens that said we need 250k troops? Who is the Commander in Chief? Who is thE Decider?


All the Democrats did was authorize the President to use our military to stop Saddam from building up his army, and using the WMDs that BUSH AND CO. lied about him having, preying on the fear of the U.S. citizens post 9/11 to get rich by going to war with Iraq.

Here is a link showing Saddam was no threat pre 9/11.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-rice-wmd.wmv

Meanwhile Exxon is posting record profits for the 2nd year in a row, and Haliburton got every no bid contract it wanted in Iraq thanks to its former CEO being is a small position of power in the Whitehouse,the Vice President.

Nice try Hotrod, but this war is all on Bush and Neo-cons stupid fks that lied to get us in, and just like thier resume predicted, mis-managed it like the dumbfks that they are.

Just a quick follow up question if you dont mind ;D

How do you really feel about Bush Ha!

[sirhcyennek81]

Israel rolled in Lebannon and killed plenty of people without any retaliation.

Hundreds of Iranian made rockets rained down on northern Israel, before and during the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. I am not sure asking Israel to part with 20,000 of their troops and putting them in the epicenter of Islamic control is the wisest choice.


:Broncos:

[24champ]

My how 4 years changes people....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNT3IWeHaKA

[freak6]

Where do you think the epa center for WWIII is anyway? It's been the holy land and we all know this and so do they.

If my neighbors have to die protecting Israel than I feel they should be right beside them.

Why should we handle the dirty work alone Freak? We are in a world war so to speak. There are war fronts all over the globe.

What point are you trying to make about WWIII?

Israel rolled in Lebannon and killed plenty of people without any retaliation.

Meck, you send in the Jews of Israel, it would only serve to rally the Muslims of all sects together to lay waste to those Jews, and once the Jews came in to Arab countries, well, they would never make it that far, they'd be massacred before they set one foot in Iraq.

<b> The strategy being employed in Iraq is to slaughter one lamb for the wolves to feed on so they don't get the flock huddled within the borders of the shabby wooden face. So long as the wolves are busy fighting over that slaughtered lamb, we are relatively save. </b>

This is a stupid strategy. The money spent on keeping a lamb slaughtered for the wolves is far to heavy. The flock is safe for now, but the better way to keep the flock safe would have been to kill the wolves rather than distract them with the slaughterd lamb, and to repair the broken fence.

While the wolves are distracted slightly, they are only growing stronger, and thier leaders sitting back away from the lamb have thier eye on the flock, and are busy thinking of new ways to get through our shabby fence. In fact, they are training diligently, and thier training camps are full.

[freak6]

Just a quick follow up question if you dont mind ;D

How do you really feel about Bush Ha!

Worst President Ever.

[Meck77]

Hundreds of Iranian made rockets rained down on northern Israel, before and during the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. I am not sure asking Israel to part with 20,000 of their troops and putting them in the epicenter of Islamic control is the wisest choice.


:Broncos:

Yeah that is what Israel's lack of cooperation basically says to me. America why don't you spend a few trillion dollars and sacrifice your own brothers and sisters to protect our Holy land.

I see no reason why they shouldn't step up. There already is a world war going on behind the scenes. Iran is ramping up for it. So is Israel and the good ole USA is the pawn.

[sirhcyennek81]

all the Democrats did was authorize the President to use our military to stop Saddam from building up his army, and using the WMDs that BUSH AND CO. lied about him having, preying on the fear of the U.S. citizens post 9/11 to get rich by going to war with Iraq.


House and Senate had the same evidence Bush had. Clinton used the same intelligence to bomb Iraq in 1998, Bush 41 used the same evidence to justify war in 1990-91. If anyone is cherrypicking, its our hysterical liberals and jackboot media.


:Broncos:

[sirhcyennek81]

Worst President Ever.


I would have to say presidents who have been impeached would have to be the worst presidents ever.


:Broncos:

[Hotrod]

House and Senate had the same evidence Bush had. Clinton used the same intelligence to bomb Iraq in 1998, Bush 41 used the same evidence to justify war in 1990-91. If anyone is cherrypicking, its our hysterical liberals and jackboot media.


:Broncos:

They dont like details ;D

[bendog]

House and Senate had the same evidence Bush had. Clinton used the same intelligence to bomb Iraq in 1998, Bush 41 used the same evidence to justify war in 1990-91. If anyone is cherrypicking, its our hysterical liberals and jackboot media.


:Broncos:

That's not true. At the time of the resolution authorizing force, no one in the senate had read Blix's reports, because Blix had not yet gotten into Iraq. Once inspections began again, there was no rational way to believe Iraq posed any near term threat to the US. Even Powell admits he was misled, though he may have been a willing stooge.

The question now, however, isn't whether bushii lied. If you don't think that by know, you never will no matter what the evidence. The question is whether there's anyway to prevent an all out civil war. I don't think so, though perhaps Iran could get the shiaa death squads to stop killing the sunni. But, then al queda really started the spiril of violence by bombing a shiaa mosque, and al queda is still in Iraq, so al queda may just play one side off the other to keep the violence going.

[Bronx33]

If they would take the handcuffs/rules off our boys which they are force to follow in this war it would have been won along time ago, politics screwed this up just as much as GWB did. Allowing news imbeds was a huge mistake IMO.

[Spider]

wel lif we get rid of Cheech and Chong http://edition.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/07/25/bush.vp/bush.cheney.file.ap.jpg
that would be a step in the right direction ;D

[bendog]

If they would take the handcuffs/rules off our boys which they are force to follow in this war it would have been won along time ago, politics screwed this up just as much as GWB did. Allowing news imbeds was a huge mistake IMO.

How? How are we gonna make two tribes that hate each other's guts enough to use power drills on humans sing kimbayah? There's only one way to deal with these people: install a brutal dictator who will torture people to death if they disturb the peace. But ,nnnnnnooooo, cheech and chong want democracy. Let these savages vote, and they'll vote for savages.

[Hotrod]

Heres the real deal IMO

Sometimes there simply is not a right/correct/good answer. The whole terrorists/WMD/nuke programs etc.....are all just big **** sandwichs and were all gonna have to take a big old bite someday.

[freak6]

That's not true. At the time of the resolution authorizing force, no one in the senate had read Blix's reports, because Blix had not yet gotten into Iraq. Once inspections began again, there was no rational way to believe Iraq posed any near term threat to the US. Even Powell admits he was misled, though he may have been a willing stooge.

The question now, however, isn't whether bushii lied. If you don't think that by know, you never will no matter what the evidence. The question is whether there's anyway to prevent an all out civil war. I don't think so, though perhaps Iran could get the shiaa death squads to stop killing the sunni. But, then al queda really started the spiril of violence by bombing a shiaa mosque, and al queda is still in Iraq, so al queda may just play one side off the other to keep the violence going.


True true and true.

Bush lied in the SOTU 2002 about the threat of Iraq going nuclear, the CIA told him and his admin explicitly not to include that into the SOTU 2002, they did so then, and over and over with...

"We don't want the next smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud"

There, I proved they lied.

Next.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This whole mess began when Iraq started launching scuds at Israel. What has their role been? I know Iraq and Israel aren't allies but they are neighbors. Surely they could get involved atleast financially. Granted we pay their bills anyway but why aren't they stepping up to do anything?
I doubt Israeli troops would be too well received there but it's not like we are. They are trying to blow our guys to bits at every turn anyhow.
I think Isreal needs to committ a few billion dollars and the 20,000 troops. They rolled into Lebannon and pulled back without any major escalation in the region. I was actually surprised by this to be honest but they got out.
Am I alone here?
Who was really threatened by Saddam in the first place? Think about it people. Was it the USA or Iraq's neighbors that he was directly attacking?

We could use help but I doubt that would do anything positive (sending in 20,000 Israeli troops). 20,000 anyone's troops just won't get it done. I'm guessing it would take a division (about 15,000 troops) or so for about every 50 miles of border to secure it. And I'm not sure how many divisions each large city would require to adequately secure them but it would be quite a few overall.

With this kind of presence we would have capacity to basically stop the insurgency (control it). Would they still hate us, no doubt but it would give us time to properly train and equip a large enough Iraqi police and security force to finally leave there.

[freak6]

And the Whitehouse later admitted they lied, and said they should not have said it in the SOTU. Alot of good that does, the damage was done. The fear mongering succeeded among the populace, and <b>in the congress, who were gullable enough to assume that after 9/11 that the President had the intregrity and honor not use that tragic event toward his own sick ambitions.

</b>The congress was gullable enough to assume the intelligence that the Whitehouse was running around with was viable, when it was not. It was intel that the CIA never got to check out, it was raw intel, 99.9% of which was BS, but anything that they could use to rally the country to war they did.

Ever heard of Downing Street?

The head of British Intelligence after meeting with the Whitehouse and the CIA, came to the conclusion "the facts are being fixed around the policy"

Great way to go to war. First, pick a country, then fix up whatever intel you can get to rally the country to support it. It was a new low for the United States, a new low for the Presidency, <b>and frankly something so unthinkable and sick that the Congress never thought it was possible. </b> But they trusted Bush, the worst President in history, and here we stand.

Fkd.

The Divided States of Embarrassment.

I should be on TV destroying the Repblicans really. This is to easy.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I should be on TV destroying the Repblicans really. This is to easy.You can do that in another thread, do you have any ideas on how to win the war in Iraq?

[bendog]

My fear was saddam had a smallpox strain ... before Blix got in. Bushii did good up till he ignored Blix, but he had the army over there so it was sort of use it or lose it. Though, he really should have just staged a couple of divisions permanently in the southern no-fly zone to get us bases outside Saudi Arabia.

I think the only hope is to "ask" Iran "nicely" to ex-nay on the death squads. But most likely they need to do their ethnic cleansing first. There seems to be a tenative deal on sharing the petro dollars with the sunni.

[ant1999e]

I'm not a liberal but what does it matter where a "solution" comes from and what don't you like about my idea?

Are there better "solutions" being offered somewhere?

I just don't think you're serious. If you are, I apologize. And it doesn't matter where solutions come from as long as we're all working on it.

[Steve Sewell]

Kind of amusing, he cited cnn, msnbc, nbc, cbs, abc, ect and that doesnt make you think its noise, but he cites foxnews and you start to laugh. One conservative news service out of 6+, and you think it lacks credibility.


:Broncos:

Part of the reason no one in this country can agree about anything is because people are becoming more and more polarized in their belief systems with regard to being conservative or liberal. They'll follow the party line eventually even if they don't necessarily agree with it. We need a "common sense" party, but I don't ever see that happening anytime soon given the levels that political thought among the masses has degenerated to at this point.

I'm against increased taxes wasted on big government...I'm against abortion...and many other "conservative" viewpoints too long to list.

I'm also against lax gun laws, big tax cuts for the rich, eliminating welfare and other social programs, this war and the reasons for it...and many other "liberal" viewpoints also too long to list.

I could be independent, but with the polarization of politics in America, and the "with us or against us" nature of the dominant political parties, it will never make a difference.

I just wish people would stop labeling people "Conservative=Republican" and "Liberal=Democrat", and start thinking in terms of their own personal ethics and morals when forming an opinion or taking a stand. If everyone would just think with their heads instead of opening their "Is this a conservative/liberal stance?" manual to for how they should think/act/vote, this country would be a lot better off in terms of the direction it's going in.

[Steve Sewell]

This whole mess began when Iraq started launching scuds at Israel. What has their role been? I know Iraq and Israel aren't allies but they are neighbors. Surely they could get involved atleast financially. Granted we pay their bills anyway but why aren't they stepping up to do anything?

I doubt Israeli troops would be too well received there but it's not like we are. They are trying to blow our guys to bits at every turn anyhow.

I think Isreal needs to committ a few billion dollars and the 20,000 troops. They rolled into Lebannon and pulled back without any major escalation in the region. I was actually surprised by this to be honest but they got out.

Am I alone here?

Who was really threatened by Saddam in the first place? Think about it people. Was it the USA or Iraq's neighbors that he was directly attacking?

Oh my goodness...can you imagine the holy war that would occur if on Israeli troop ever set foot on Iraqi soil to help the Americans? I shudder to think of what the consequences of that would be. Think Shia's hating Sunni's and multiply that by 1 million.

[55CrushEm]

True true and true.

Bush lied in the SOTU 2002 about the threat of Iraq going nuclear, the CIA told him and his admin explicitly not to include that into the SOTU 2002, they did so then, and over and over with...

"We don't want the next smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud"

There, I proved they lied.

Next.

No you didn't......as you and slug so often demand....."Where's a link?"

If you provide it....then that is another story.

[Steve Sewell]

Yeah that is what Israel's lack of cooperation basically says to me. America why don't you spend a few trillion dollars and sacrifice your own brothers and sisters to protect our Holy land.

I see no reason why they shouldn't step up. There already is a world war going on behind the scenes. Iran is ramping up for it. So is Israel and the good ole USA is the pawn.

I think it's incredibly simplistic to think that the US-Israeli friendship is a one way street. The US receives HUGE financial benefits (both directly and indirectly) by being in bed with Israel, otherwise we wouldn't be in partnership with them. Trust me, the US isn't doing anyone any favors out of the kindness of their hearts, and to think otherwise is naive. EVERYTHING the US does is out of self interest in protecting it's military and economic place in the world.

This is akin to the people who believe that the US entered WWII to stop the Nazi's from killing the Jews. The real reason we entered the war because the government saw that their power was being threatened by Germany and because it saw an opportunity to become THE dominant world power and they took it.

[loborugger]

What makes anyone think that 500,000 troops would control all the borders and bring peace?

We put that many in to Vietnam with no luck. The Soviets put a full million into Afghanistan, with no luck. Maybe 5 million, 10 million US troops could bring order. Maybe. I wouldnt hold my breath. And at that point, corruption would become a MAJOR issue.

I read an article stating that a bunch of Shi' military leaders were already pulling outta Baghdad - in anticipation of the "surge", aka the most telegraphed punch in history. Nothing like announcing in the press that you are going to hit the enemy 3 or 4 weeks before your first strike. We will go into Baghdad, "run all the Shi militia outta Baghdad (you know, the ones that are already withdrawing)", pat ourselves on the back, and call it mission accomplished (again).

The situation in Iraq reminds me of that old joke from Vietnam. "I can get you a great deal on ARVN rifles. Never been fired and only been dropped once." Iraq will never succeed because Iraqis are making so little effort to make it succeed.

"Woohoo, the Americans have liberated us from that butcher Saddam. What should we do. I know, lets go mortar attack the nearest Shi/Sunni Mosque."

The biggest arguement given to us by the current regime is that pulling out now would lead to catastrophic consequences. Thats the same line of logic we were fed about Vietnam. Thailand would fall to the communists. Laos would go communist, etc, etc. And it didnt happen. And what woulda mattered if it did? Communism's wheels fell off 15 years later. How long will it be before people become utterly and completely disenchanted by hate spouting religious extremists.

If we pull out, we would be doing ourselves a favor. Further, we would leave the mess for the Saudis, Iranians, Kuwaitis, and Syrians to fix - along with of course the Iraqis - the group that needs to get the butt in gear in the first place. And lets look at that group. The Saudis profess to be our allies, yet they do all kinds of very unAmerican things. Lets not forget that most of the 9/11 bombers were from there. Then there is Kuwait. The way I figure, Kuwait owes us big time for pulling their bacon outta the fire 15 years ago. Then there is Syria and Iran... the two main culprits of the problems. My guess is that they are sitting in Damascus and Tehran praying that we NEVER pull outta Iraq. Well, I say, turn the tables. Let them work towards fixing the problem instead of exacerbating it.

[ak1971]

we should use 'mini-nukes':~ohyah!:

[bendog]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070201/ap_on_go_pr_wh/kissinger_albright;_ylt=AnFGSyYvHphQ8qOOfP5qwCiyFz 4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-

sigh, a year and a half till the adults take charge again.

[Steve Sewell]

I would have to say presidents who have been impeached would have to be the worst presidents ever.


:Broncos:

Getting a BJ and lying about it is, in your opinion, worse than promoting (yes, I said promoting) and hastily advancing a war which was fraudulently based on another countries role in an attack on our country and the threat that said country posed to the US? LMFAO

[Steve Sewell]

And the Whitehouse later admitted they lied, and said they should not have said it in the SOTU. Alot of good that does, the damage was done. The fear mongering succeeded among the populace, and <b>in the congress, who were gullable enough to assume that after 9/11 that the President had the intregrity and honor not use that tragic event toward his own sick ambitions.

</b>The congress was gullable enough to assume the intelligence that the Whitehouse was running around with was viable, when it was not. It was intel that the CIA never got to check out, it was raw intel, 99.9% of which was BS, but anything that they could use to rally the country to war they did.

Ever heard of Downing Street?

The head of British Intelligence after meeting with the Whitehouse and the CIA, came to the conclusion "the facts are being fixed around the policy"

Great way to go to war. First, pick a country, then fix up whatever intel you can get to rally the country to support it. It was a new low for the United States, a new low for the Presidency, <b>and frankly something so unthinkable and sick that the Congress never thought it was possible. </b> But they trusted Bush, the worst President in history, and here we stand.

Fkd.

The Divided States of Embarrassment.

I should be on TV destroying the Repblicans really. This is to easy.

The saddest part is that the majority of us fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.

[Hotrod]

Focus people focus were looking for answers here not pissing matches ;D

[Steve Sewell]

What makes anyone think that 500,000 troops would control all the borders and bring peace?

We put that many in to Vietnam with no luck. The Soviets put a full million into Afghanistan, with no luck. Maybe 5 million, 10 million US troops could bring order. Maybe. I wouldnt hold my breath. And at that point, corruption would become a MAJOR issue.

I read an article stating that a bunch of Shi' military leaders were already pulling outta Baghdad - in anticipation of the "surge", aka the most telegraphed punch in history. Nothing like announcing in the press that you are going to hit the enemy 3 or 4 weeks before your first strike. We will go into Baghdad, "run all the Shi militia outta Baghdad (you know, the ones that are already withdrawing)", pat ourselves on the back, and call it mission accomplished (again).

The situation in Iraq reminds me of that old joke from Vietnam. "I can get you a great deal on ARVN rifles. Never been fired and only been dropped once." Iraq will never succeed because Iraqis are making so little effort to make it succeed.

"Woohoo, the Americans have liberated us from that butcher Saddam. What should we do. I know, lets go mortar attack the nearest Shi/Sunni Mosque."

The biggest arguement given to us by the current regime is that pulling out now would lead to catastrophic consequences. Thats the same line of logic we were fed about Vietnam. Thailand would fall to the communists. Laos would go communist, etc, etc. And it didnt happen. And what woulda mattered if it did? Communism's wheels fell off 15 years later. How long will it be before people become utterly and completely disenchanted by hate spouting religious extremists.

If we pull out, we would be doing ourselves a favor. Further, we would leave the mess for the Saudis, Iranians, Kuwaitis, and Syrians to fix - along with of course the Iraqis - the group that needs to get the butt in gear in the first place. And lets look at that group. The Saudis profess to be our allies, yet they do all kinds of very unAmerican things. Lets not forget that most of the 9/11 bombers were from there. Then there is Kuwait. The way I figure, Kuwait owes us big time for pulling their bacon outta the fire 15 years ago. Then there is Syria and Iran... the two main culprits of the problems. My guess is that they are sitting in Damascus and Tehran praying that we NEVER pull outta Iraq. Well, I say, turn the tables. Let them work towards fixing the problem instead of exacerbating it.

Yep, the Saudi's, Iranians, and Iraqis wouldn't want to **** things up too bad because there is so much $$$ involved. I think (especially the Iranians) use religion as an excuse to cull the enthusiasm of the masses, just like the US used fear and paranoia to do the same to us. It really just comes down to $$...we are trying to get our piece of the pie and the Iranians are trying to protect theres, or vice versa (whichever way you want to see it).

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I just don't think you're serious. If you are, I apologize. And it doesn't matter where solutions come from as long as we're all working on it.This isn't the first time (saying it for over two years now) I said we need to actually control that country if we want to get out of it.

Right now, every time we clear an area, the radical religious factions move right back into them because we can't leave anyone behind to patrol them. What's the point in wasting American lives for this wasted effort? The movement across the borders is basically UNchecked! There is no possible way to control movement with only 150,000 troops in that country. This added 21,500 troops brings us up to the same number that was there in late 2005 (about 160,000).

What's the point of continually sacrificing Americans in this no win scenario?

I'm listening if someone has another plan? If not then why shouldn't we start the draft, make this a real war, and win it?

[Denver Crush]

Getting a BJ and lying about it is, in your opinion, worse than promoting (yes, I said promoting) and hastily advancing a war which was fraudulently based on another countries role in an attack on our country and the threat that said country posed to the US? LMFAO


No, he just didnt have any better comeback. I just dont see how people can really say that bush did the right thing when he expanded the war from afghanistan to iraq. The only reason we went in there is to set up military bases to expand it even more by pushing on into iran and syria. For what? If we had stayed in afganistan soley we could be quite possibly talking about victory right now and the world would have still respected us in the morning. Who knows, maybe even bush would be considered a great president. All that is ****ed and running down our leg now.

[Meck77]

I think it's incredibly simplistic to think that the US-Israeli friendship is a one way street. The US receives HUGE financial benefits (both directly and indirectly) by being in bed with Israel, otherwise we wouldn't be in partnership with them. Trust me, the US isn't doing anyone any favors out of the kindness of their hearts, and to think otherwise is naive.

Well I'd like to trust you but I'd rather seems some links and facts. Here are some.

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

As of 1997 we've sent the equivalent of $23,000 per Israeli citizen of us tax payer money. Money that IMO would be better spent on our own problems.

So go ahead and reference all these financial benefits we are getting in return and explain to me why Israel should soak up more US tax payer money than any other country in the WORLD.

[Steve Sewell]

Focus people focus were looking for answers here not pissing matches ;D

eh, it hasn't devolved that far yet but when you get into discussions about war people get all in a tizzy (including myself).

[Steve Sewell]

Well I'd like to trust you but I'd rather seems some links and facts. Here are some.

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

As of 1997 we were sending the equivalent of $24,000 per Israeli citizen of us tax payer money. Money that IMO would be better spent on our own problems.

So go ahead and reference all these financial benefits we are getting in return.

And you believe that we are doing this out of the goodness of our hearts? It's good for business to have Israel thriving in the Middle East. Like I said, your viewpoint is simplistic if you are looking at simply the financial aid they get from us.

EDIT: I saw that you wanted me to list financial benefits of having Israel as a stable power in the ME. Here's some good reading for you:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/special.html

[Meck77]

So you failed to list all the FACTS and financial benefits of us sending billions of dollars to Israel and protecting them from Saddam back in 1991.

Anyone know how much we've spent protecting them on this second go round anyway? How about a total cost of both Gulf Wars + all the financial aide sent to Israel.

Come on Steve you have all the facts. Break it down and prove to me how this cost outweighs the benefits for America.

Israel is our ally right? Well it's time for them to step up and act like one for once.

[Spider]

Ha! Sylvan hasa tutor for even that

[Steve Sewell]

So you failed to list all the FACTS and financial benefits of us sending billions of dollars to Israel and protecting them from Saddam back in 1991.

Anyone know how much we've spent protecting them on this second go round anyway? How about a total cost of both Gulf Wars + all the financial aide sent to Israel.

Come on Steve you have all the facts. Break it down and prove to me how this cost outweighs the benefits for America.

See my post above (I added to it)...it goes much further than simple financial aid figures. This article will leave your head spinning.

And the reason we protect them is because we BENEFIT from having there there!

[Meck77]

And you believe that we are doing this out of the goodness of our hearts? It's good for business to have Israel thriving in the Middle East. Like I said, your viewpoint is simplistic if you are looking at simply the financial aid they get from us.

EDIT: I saw that you wanted me to list financial benefits of having Israel as a stable power in the ME. Here's some good reading for you:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/special.html

Oh come one. Could you pick a more biased website? give me a break

[Steve Sewell]

Well I'd like to trust you but I'd rather seems some links and facts. Here are some.

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

As of 1997 we've sent the equivalent of $23,000 per Israeli citizen of us tax payer money. Money that IMO would be better spent on our own problems.

So go ahead and reference all these financial benefits we are getting in return and explain to me why Israel should soak up more US tax payer money than any other country in the WORLD.

Also, look further into the link that you so kindly provided. This article explains it all. Don't just look at the numbers, look at the reasons behind them:

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm#Israel

[Spider]

Idont understand the Jewish help either , they dont even have a NFL team for crying out loud .........

[Steve Sewell]

Oh come one. Could you pick a more biased website? give me a break

Fine, read my post recent post...before ripping on the link I provide, you should try doing some research on the ones that you provide.

[Steve Sewell]

Idont understand the Jewish help either , they dont even have a NFL team for crying out loud .........

Denver has a very large and vibrant Jewish population...I'm sure many are Broncos fans. Does that justify your support?? LOL

[Spider]

Denver has a very large and vibrant Jewish population...I'm sure many are Broncos fans. Does that justify your support?? LOL

;D it helps

[Steve Sewell]

Meck, the reality is that there are opposing viewpoints and facts that support both of our stances. I just refuse to believe, given our countries track record, that we'll ever do anything that is not in the economic interests of our country. There is always a catch if we're handing out money or financially supporting another country.

[freak6]

No you didn't......as you and slug so often demand....."Where's a link?"

If you provide it....then that is another story.

lmao!

Go look up the 2002 SOTU yourself, and research the yellowcake lie. The whitehouse later admitted that the yellowcake lie should not have been in the speech, duh, since the CIA sent them 4 memos telling them to take it out, but they didn't....

If you had any knowledge on the subject matter, you wouldn't need a link. I'll get you started...

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

I SLAY EVERYONE WITH MY FACT AXE! WOOO!!!

<b>Beerslug - </b>I have plenty of ideas on how to in the War on Terror. I have detailed them many times.

1. Go kill everyone in the Al Qaeda camps in Talibanistan (NW Pakistan),
2. destroy all of the Afghan poppy crops, and with the money for the GWOT,
3. start using that to fortify our defenses and on intelligence to kill more cells that are thriving world wide.

KILL KILL KILL

And don't make more terrorists by trying to force democracy down fundamental muslim's throats, they are'nt ready for it...

As far as Iraq, <b><font size=6>we already did win. </b><font size=2>It's long past time to pull out. Once they had thier votes, ratified the constitution, we should have pulled out. Abu Ghraib etc... only created more terrorists. Staying there only fueled thier recruiting ranks, and gave them a fresh training area with fresh Marines and Soldiers to use as target practice.