The Soldiers Speak. Will President Bush Listen?

[RickSp]

The Soldiers Speak. Will President Bush Listen?

When President Bush held a public meeting with troops by satellite last fall, they were miraculously upbeat. And all along, unrepentant hawks (most of whom have never been to Iraq) have insisted that journalists are misreporting Iraq and that most soldiers are gung-ho about their mission. Hogwash! A new poll to be released today shows that U.S. soldiers overwhelmingly want out of Iraq — and soon. The poll is the first of U.S. troops currently serving in Iraq, according to John Zogby, the pollster. Conducted by Zogby International and LeMoyne College, it asked 944 service members, "How long should U.S. troops stay in Iraq?" Only 23 percent backed Mr. Bush's position that they should stay as long as necessary. In contrast, 72 percent said that U.S. troops should be pulled out within one year. Of those, 29 percent said they should withdraw "immediately." That's one more bit of evidence that our grim stay-the-course policy in Iraq has failed. Even the American troops on the ground don't buy into it — and having administration officials pontificate from the safety of Washington about the need for ordinary soldiers to stay the course further erodes military morale. While the White House emphasizes the threat from non-Iraqi terrorists, only 26 percent of the U.S. troops say that the insurgency would end if those foreign fighters could be kept out. A plurality believes that the insurgency is made up overwhelmingly of discontented Iraqi Sunnis. So what would it take to win in Iraq? Maybe that was the single most depressing finding in this poll. By a two-to-one ratio, the troops said that "to control the insurgency we need to double the level of ground troops and bombing missions." And since there is zero chance of that happening, a majority of troops seemed to be saying that they believe this war to be unwinnable.

How many more will die in this needless war before the Emperor/President acknowledges the truth?

[Scribbler1]

Bush seems to give lip service to the troops as it is and doesn't show a lot of genuine concern for them. I doubt this will mean a damn thing to him. The first couple of thousand didn't.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: RickSp The Soldiers Speak. Will President Bush Listen? How many more will die in this needless war before the Emperor/President acknowledges the truth?

hows about acknowledging the truth that abandoning Iraq in its current state will leave them defenseless? leaving them now would just leave a sitting duck with a broken wing.

[PatrickHenry]

Who broke the duck's wing?

Who cares about the f*ckin duck?

Where did my money go?

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Who broke the duck's wing? Who cares about the f*ckin duck? Where did my money go?

Suddam broke the duck's wing.
we are fixing the duck so the duck can fight back, more like turning a duck into a peregrine falcon. your money went to save countless numbers of lives in Iraq.

[bishop]

there are more important things our country needs to be focused on than iraq... time for them to run their own country. let's just see how the middle east can handle democracy. it's a good test of the bullshit neocon strategy..


and it's good to see this poll come out. the military servicemen/women should have a say in military decisions imo, and hopefully this could lead to that culture change. i'm not saying that low level soldiers should have a say, but nco's and above should be able to have their voice counted. otherwise they're just a bunch of pawns for the elite.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: dthmstr254 Suddam broke the duck's wing. we are fixing the duck so the duck can fight back, more like turning a duck into a peregrine falcon. your money went to save countless numbers of lives in Iraq.

I hate to tell you this but that money's gone and we haven't saved ONE life.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: bishop and it's good to see this poll come out. the military servicemen/women should have a say in military decisions imo, and hopefully this could lead to that culture change. i'm not saying that low level soldiers should have a say, but nco's and above should be able to have their voice counted. otherwise they're just a bunch of pawns for the elite.

I really have problems with this. I worry about them being burdened with information which would ALLOW such a decision to be made. Yes, they ARE pawns. They always have been and always will be pawns. That is what a nation's military IS. I don't want them second-guessing their orders or having reservations about what they must do.

As unlikely as it seems right now, the day MAY come when the order to war is a proper and legitimate one and I want these guys focused on what they are told to do, both for our sakes and especially for theirs. Questions cause uncertainty, which causes indecision and that can get you killed.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: Scribbler1 I hate to tell you this but that money's gone and we haven't saved ONE life.

oh, so you are sure that Suddam was going to quit killing his citizens? you are sure that Suddam, who was unreliable at best, was going to uphold any treaty? if so, how can you be sure? he would still be alive and killing, and he would have killed more Iraqis than we could have imagined dying in collateral. what did you expect? you think removing a tyrant was going to be easy? check out the world wars or the Revolutionary war.go on a hunting trip. you think the bear is going to lay down its arms? :rolleyes:

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: bishop there are more important things our country needs to be focused on than iraq... time for them to run their own country. let's just see how the middle east can handle democracy. it's a good test of the bullshit neocon strategy..

without an army? it wouldn't last a month before some tyrant or another invaded.

[Matt W]

That's the point, dthmstr254. Is it the US business to be 'nation-building'? If people want democracy, they have to get to it on their own two feet.

[RickSp]

Quote by: dthmstr254 hows about acknowledging the truth that abandoning Iraq in its current state will leave them defenseless? leaving them now would just leave a sitting duck with a broken wing.

Molly Ivens talks about the "Rule of Holes" - if you dig yourself into one, stop digging. You may not have noticed but the longer we stay the worse the situation has become. Continuing a failed policy in a war we never should have starterd will only lead to more dead on all sides.

If we "stay the course" we will ultimately be leaving Iraq by helicopters from the embassy roof.

[G. Adams]

Quote by: dthmstr254 oh, so you are sure that Suddam was going to quit killing his citizens? you are sure that Suddam, who was unreliable at best, was going to uphold any treaty?

Saddam reigned from '79 til december 2003, over 23 years. In that time he killed approximately 700 000 of his own citizens. That's a kill ratio of approx 83.3 people per day. The coalition of the willing of been there since early 2003, almost 3 years. According the Lancet, around 100 000 Iraqi's had died by October 2004. Nobody gives a shit about dead Ay-rabs, it's hard to tell how many have died since, but let's give you the benefit of the doubt, and say NOBODY has died since. So, that gives the coalition a kill ratio of 91.3 per day in the last three years, even though we know it must be way higher, as many have died per day since.

So, for the Iraqi people, all you have done is come along, destroyed the infrastructure, upped the kill count and brought it to the brink of a civil war. And guess what, this was all predicted by the anti-war crowd.

In light of this, tell me, how are you helping?

[bishop]

Quote by: Scribbler1 I really have problems with this. I worry about them being burdened with information which would ALLOW such a decision to be made. Yes, they ARE pawns. They always have been and always will be pawns. That is what a nation's military IS. I don't want them second-guessing their orders or having reservations about what they must do. As unlikely as it seems right now, the day MAY come when the order to war is a proper and legitimate one and I want these guys focused on what they are told to do, both for our sakes and especially for theirs. Questions cause uncertainty, which causes indecision and that can get you killed.

soldiers always second-guess their orders. every ex-military person i've ever talked to says that one of the things soldiers do best is complain. and it wasn't like i suggested that all soldiers should have a say - i merely suggested that some of the lower level officers should have a say. private johnny walker still has to follow his orders. and given that our country has been in the business of empire building ever since ww2 and korea, i think the military ought to have a say in the decision making process.. doesn't mean that anyone is forced to listen to them, but their voices won't be censored/muted as they usually are. it just seems right imo.

[bishop]

Quote by: dthmstr254 without an army? it wouldn't last a month before some tyrant or another invaded.

now, that's a total load of bullshit.. who's going to invade them? iran? the same iran that is trying hard as hell to avoid being sanctioned by the security council so they can build their nukes? yeah.. i'm so sure that they'd rather pick up a quagmire and abandon their plans for nukes. who else you gonna worry about? big, bad syria?

fuck iraq.. let them take care of their own country.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: dthmstr254 oh, so you are sure that Suddam was going to quit killing his citizens? you are sure that Suddam, who was unreliable at best, was going to uphold any treaty? if so, how can you be sure? he would still be alive and killing, and he would have killed more Iraqis than we could have imagined dying in collateral. what did you expect?

I would expect you to have something to back up those assumprions. I don't have to be "sure" about what I said because people have died wholesale since we invaded. That is FACT. You have a string of rambling "what ifs".

you think removing a tyrant was going to be easy? check out the world wars or the Revolutionary war.go on a hunting trip. you think the bear is going to lay down its arms? :rolleyes:

Arms, as in GUNS???

And selectively removing tyrants at our discretion and who we have falsely labeled a threat to the US is not the business of the United States. If you think Iraq is the same thing as the Revolutionary war or the two World Wars you need to ask that school to give your parents their money back.

[Rainbow]

"Only 23 percent backed Mr. Bush's position that they should stay as long as necessary. In contrast, 72 percent said that U.S. troops should be pulled out within one year. Of those, 29 percent said they should withdraw "immediately."

It seems to indicate that :
- Pentagon should consider a new policy for recruiting a military personnel

[bishop]

or maybe the military should prohibit soldiers from doing things like watching cnn - to protect them from seeing any news that could hurt their opinion of the "mission"... see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil..

[Sandy]

It's time to bring our boys home! We trained the Iraqi army with our lives, money and blood and it is time to stop. Let them sink or swim. I need our boys home so we can build our own ports. Protect our own borders and start feeling like Americans again.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: Sandy We trained the Iraqi army with our lives, money and blood and it is time to stop.

Wrong, even that's not working out.

"The only Iraqi battalion capable of fighting without U.S. support has been downgraded to a level requiring them to fight with American troops backing them up, the Pentagon said Friday."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/...ity/index.html