Reid: Someone Tell Bush the War in Iraq is Lost

[kajagoogoo]

Victory? Defense against mad-men? We (Americans) have no right to lie to people and tell them this is some 'whozawhatsit' about terrorism and the godless muslim hordes... next it's going to be Korea and we've been hearing that those suicidal Russian drunks are starting to come out of their post communistic collapsable Siberian hibernation blues. To tell the truth, not one of those soldiers is working for anyone but their three hots and a cot and if anyone tells you different their blowing smoke up your ass.

[The Decider]

Quote by: Apeman81 WMDs were not the only, nor the primary, reason for the overthrow of Saddam.

The use of force resolution passed by Congress makes no mention of "regime change."

Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

Quote by: Apeman81 Perhaps we should look at these “insurgents”. Who are they? What are their goals? If we leave Iraq before it can successfully establish its own security, what will these “insurgents” visit upon the people of Iraq?

Shiite militias. Sunni militias. Foreign groups. Gangs. Thugs. Opportunists. We have 160,000 troups trying to tame those groups while the Iraqi politicians delay and debate and argue about political reforms that never pass. Maybe we should take a look at the "government" our young soldiers are dying to protect. Men like Maliki who have close ties to Shiite militias and al-Sadr. A corrupt Iraqi military. Robbers of reconstruction accounts. Maybe we need to look beyond our "Islamist" myopia and see who we are defending and the role they are playing in creating the anger and resentment that allows insurgents and militia groups to thrive.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Sonart The only ones that don't know it are the ones who don't WANT to know it.

Truly the War Party has no clothes. The various justifications for the invasion of Iraq have been shown for the falsehoods that they were and are. The lack of planning, strategy and basic competence in the disastrous occupation are all too obvious for anyone not drowning in denial. Now Bush intends a war without an exit strategy that will go on indefinitely regardless of how much blood will be spilled and treasure wasted.

Only Senator Reid had the courage to speak the obvious truth. The War Party has no clothes. The war is lost.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Apeman While it may have hoped that the Iraqi’s would create, once given the freedom to create, their new government as a “secular, pro-US government” one, it was certainly not a term upon which the overthrow of Saddam was predicated.

The hell it wasn't... that's EXACTLY the assumption upon which it was predicated.

Quote by: Apeman Iraqi oil revenues was not a stated goal of the overthrow of Saddam

Yeah, right :rolleyes: ... although we were promised that Iraqi oil money would pay for the war.

Quote by: Apeman WMDs were not the only, nor the primary, reason for the overthrow of Saddam

They were exactly the main reason we were given for overthrowing Saddam. Revisit Bush and Powell's speeches.

Quote by: Apeman The war to overthrow Saddam has been won. It is complete.

If that makes you feel better, go or it. Recall, however, that it took 8 months to capture Hussein, by which time the insurgency was rolling along quite nicely and Hussein had become irrelevent. I guess we won the war again when we killed al-Zarqawi, huh!

So if we won the war, Apeman, why can't we leave?

Quote by: Apeman Perhaps we should look at these “insurgents”. Who are they? What are their goals? If we leave Iraq before it can successfully establish its own security, what will these “insurgents” visit upon the people of Iraq?

What are they visiting upon the people of Iraq now???? Certainly nothing we seem capable of stopping.

.

[RickSp]

Ape makes the argument that Reid's truth-telling is damaging to our troops in the field. Now an active duty officer, an Iraq veteran who is deputy commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, is suggesting as much and more.

Army Officer Accuses Generals of 'Intellectual and Moral Failures'

[Century 25]

...Bush opened a Pandora's Box.. and this country is.. and has been from the get-go.. addicted to War.. $$$

It is the SOS.. you just fill in the date(s)..

[Zeebadee]

Anyone that continues to claim that this war isn't about oil is simply being naive. That being said, the U.S. can not afford to walk away from the reserves up for grabs in Iraq. I'm no economist, but with the dollar continuing to decline in value, the damage to our economy if we have to bid against the stronger currencies to get the oil we need would be devastating. With peak oil looking us right in the face, we simply can't afford to lose access to this supply by being outbid on it. It's one thing to fight the Iraqi insurgents now for the oil we need, it's another to have to fight the Chinese or the Russians later for it.

Congress was totally complicit in starting this war, it can't reasonably expect to be able to just walk away from it now. We've got a tiger by the tail, if we let go, it's gonna turn and eat us.

[Sugar]

Do you really think Bush is going to accept that the war is lost? No way.

How will he then justify the billons spent of the war and the loss of life of thousands of soldiers who died in the war.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Century 25 ...Bush opened a Pandora's Box.. and this country is.. and has been from the get-go.. addicted to War.. $$$ It is the SOS.. you just fill in the date(s)..

The Bush adminstration is even backing off from claims that the surge is working. No coherent strategy and more dead Americans. War without end, amen.

The White House Scales Back Talk of Iraq Progress

The Bush administration will not try to assess whether the troop increase in Iraq is producing signs of political progress or greater security until September, and many of Mr. Bush’s top advisers now anticipate that any gains by then will be limited, according to senior administration officials. In interviews over the past week, the officials made clear that the White House is gradually scaling back its expectations for the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. The timelines they are now discussing suggest that the White House may maintain the increased numbers of American troops in Iraq well into next year. That prospect would entail a dramatically longer commitment of frontline troops, patrolling the most dangerous neighborhoods of Baghdad, than the one envisioned in legislation that passed the House and Senate this week. That vote, largely symbolic because Democrats do not have the votes to override the promised presidential veto, set deadlines that would lead to the withdrawal of combat troops by the end of March 2008.

[bishop]

what a surprise... :rolleyes:


the word "surge" is completely inaccurate given the indefinite length of time it's expected to last.. it's an escalation, plain and simple. and, when the administration was attempting to hype up the "success" of the escalation, they intentionally didn't include deaths by suicide/car bombings.. just to make the numbers look better - as if anyone except american dead-enders still support this war.

IRAQ: Troop Surge Touted as Success, But Casualty Stats Incomplete


and according to this article, now that u.s. troops are leaving their "green" zones, and venturing into insurgent strongholds - our ability to hold the territory is questionable (given the overextension of the troops and the ambiguous/non-existant mission)..

Is the Surge Backfiring? | TIME

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Sugar Do you really think Bush is going to accept that the war is lost? No way. How will he then justify the billons spent of the war and the loss of life of thousands of soldiers who died in the war.

There it is.

If Bush can hang on in Iraq for 20 more months, I suspect he figures the loss goes against whoever relieves him. If he pulls out of Iraq before he leaves office, it will simply confirm all the incompetence that's led us to this point, and his legacy is sealed.

(not that it isn't already)

.

[medi]

Quote by: Sonart . There it is. If Bush can hang on in Iraq for 20 more months, I suspect he figures the loss goes against whoever relieves him. If he pulls out of Iraq before he leaves office, it will simply confirm all the incompetence that's led us to this point, and his legacy is sealed. (not that it isn't already) .

Yeah, you had it right on target. Your analysis is perfectly fine.

[rmnunez]

Yes, I suppose it makes sense, from a critical lefty perspective, to figure that since the war is lost, since Bush wouldn't want to underline this with a retreat, we should get some sort of holding effort to forestall what is inevitably to follow -withdrawal. When Iraq succumbs to the chaos which has to follow a military pullout, this can be blamed on whoever succeeds him to the presidency.

Its interesting how denouement for Bush replicates his father's. Desert Storm was inconclusive too. Junior went back to finish the job, got Saddam out of the way, but this occupation isn't working.

[bishop]

what is a "critical lefty perspective"???

bush has repeatedly stated that he isn't going to do anything other than stay the course. withdrawal will be left up to his successor, in hopes that iraq's inevitable failure will go down as someone else's failure. bush wants to limit his losses, since he is responsible for getting us mired in this unnecessary mess.

[RickSp]

Quote by: rmnunez When Iraq succumbs to the chaos which has to follow a military pullout, this can be blamed on whoever succeeds him to the presidency. Its interesting how denouement for Bush replicates his father's. Desert Storm was inconclusive too. Junior went back to finish the job, got Saddam out of the way, but this occupation isn't working.

LOL. What foolishness. As wars go, Desert Storm was decisive and final. The objective was to drive the Iraqis from Kuwait. Its objectives were clear and limited and they were accomplished. There was no job to finish.

Even members of the Bush administration are doubting whether a pull-out would result in chaos.

Doubts About Doomsday

The president is suggesting that a troop withdrawal would turn Iraq into a battleground between regional powers. Not so, says a senior administration official. Bush’s argument is based on a doomsday scenario for Iraq, where troop withdrawals turn the country into a sanctuary for Al Qaeda and a battleground between regional powers. “Precipitous withdrawal from Iraq is not a plan to bring peace to the region or to make our people safer at home,” Bush said. “It could unleash chaos in Iraq that could spread across the entire region. It would be an invitation to the enemy to attack America and our friends around the world.” But in private, some of Bush’s most senior aides dispute that scenario. One senior administration official with extensive knowledge of the region, who didn’t want to be identified discussing sensitive policy matters, tells NEWSWEEK that the chances of a regional war in Iraq are low in the event of a U.S. withdrawal. When asked if a regional war would break out, the official said: “Possibly, not probably. It’s more likely that other powers would support their favorite militias, as they’re doing already.”

[bishop]

call me crazy, but i don't think iraq's shiite groups (particularly the medhi militia) are big fans of al qaeda...

but, how can you argue with people whose perspectives are clouded by irrational fear?

[RickSp]

Quote by: bishop call me crazy, but i don't think iraq's shiite groups (particularly the medhi militia) are big fans of al qaeda... but, how can you argue with people whose perspectives are clouded by irrational fear?

Even many of the Sunni insurgents are not crazy about AlQaeda. As long a the infidel occupation is under way, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Once the Americans leave AlQaeda is in serious trouble in Iraq.

George Bush let AlQaeda into Iraq and George Bush's occupation has given them cover to stay.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: rmnunez When Iraq succumbs to the chaos which has to follow a military pullout, this can be blamed on whoever succeeds him to the presidency.

You really think there could be significantly more chaos than there already is?

Quote by: rmnunez Desert Storm was inconclusive too. Junior went back to finish the job, got Saddam out of the way, but this occupation isn't working.

To the contrary, Desert Storm was totally conclusive. Hussein's forces were removed from Kuwait, his military all but destroyed in the process, and Kuwait was peacefully handed back to its rightful government. End of operation, mission accomplished.

"Junior" went back to do what his father clearly knew -- and clearly stated -- was a really, really BAD idea... the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

.

[RickSp]

Inside the Green Zone

To most visiting American dignitaries, the placid, palm-lined streets of the Green Zone are the only glimpse of Iraq they see; to Iraqis, it might as well be another continent. "Living here is like living in Europe," says Haider Hassan, a store clerk at the $280-a-night al-Rasheed Hotel inside the Green Zone. "You miss nothing, starting with electricity, power, water and security. Outside the gates is hell." But these days hell is starting to feel a lot closer. Even as the U.S. boosts its military presence in Baghdad, violence across Iraq has remained implacable--evidenced most dramatically on Monday in Diyala province, north of Baghdad, when a suicide bomber killed nine U.S. soldiers, one of the deadliest attacks against the military since the war began. Since the start of the U.S. surge, those kinds of insurgent strikes have become more frequent in areas outside the capital. But anxiety is rising in the Green Zone too. Some U.S. soldiers have orders not to travel through the area alone for fear of kidnapping. On March 27, a rocket landed in the complex of housing trailers near the U.S. embassy, killing a U.S. soldier. Security forces were tipped off to the location of two suicide vests, and rumors floated that authorities were looking for a third. That missing vest may have been worn by the suicide bomber who killed one Iraqi politician and wounded 22 in the parliament cafeteria on April 12--an attack that shattered any remaining notion that life in the walled city could go untouched by the battles raging outside. After the bombing, Lieut. Colonel Christopher Garver, a U.S. military spokesman, said, "The Green Zone is not safe." In that assessment lies a portent of doom for the U.S. in Iraq. From the start, the occupation has been informed by illusions--about the strength of the insurgency, about the level of antagonism among Iraq's sects, about the very nature of Arab society and culture. Those illusions could be sustained as long as you stayed within the protected confines of the Green Zone. As much as any other indicator, the deterioration of security inside this ostensible fortress underscores the extent to which the war has spiraled out of the U.S.'s control.

The US doesn't even control the Green Zone. What part of "we have lost the war" is a surprise?

[rmnunez]

Pullout ill be accomp'lished once maintenance of basic functions from within te Green Zone is no longer possible. The surge needs to clear a perifery adequate to prevent mortars, projectiles or missiles launched by insurgents from striking vital institutions within it.