RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,163312_2,00.html

"Richard Armitage, Max Boot, Robert Kagan, Bill Kristol, Ralph Peters, Gary Schmitt and R. James Woolsey?" Yup... another "cabal" of folks who know better than everyone else how to run the country.
"William Kristol's father Irving Kristol, the "godfather" of American neoconservativism, established a hierarchy of truth. "There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people," he once said in an interview. "There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy." " This kind of thinking is traced back to the controversial Leo Strauss. And guess who was a proud disciple of Mr. Strauss? Paul Wolfowitz, former #2 in DOD and primary author of the PNAC document Rebuilding America's Defenses, the presumed blueprint for Cheney and Rumsfeld. All I can say is....

Great column. It should be mandatory reading for everyone who thinks the surge is just grand. How long has this "temporary" surge been going on? How many of our alleged goals to be achieved by the surge have been accomplished? This column is right on target. The surge is nothing but a delaying strategy designed to make gullible Americans think something's being accomplished.

Here's a fascinating article from Rolling Stone Magazine by Arabic-speaking journalist Nir Rosen. The Myth of the Surge We are arming a slew of competing groups who are simply biding their time until they can really go to war with each other and eventually against us with their new American weapons.

If you have listened to John McCain just over the past year, rather than over the past 5 years, it is reasonable to conclude that he is a willing dupe of the Neocons. But very early -perhaps earlier even than John Murtha- McCain commented that this was a war that shouldn't have been fought, and was one being fought in a disastrously wrong way.

McCain's conclusion was that the best way out of this badly-conceived and worse-executed war was to win it. He believes that losing this war -which also includes in his mind withdrawing from this war- would have devastating effects on America today and into the future.

McCain's original assessment of Bush's war against Islam was correct. His conclusion was wrong. Still, this is a demonstration of the man's resolve; and should be respected.

I believe it was once said, and demonstrated many times to be true, that "Truth is the first casualty of war". The Prussian Clausewitz is supposed to have said that "War is Diplomacy by other means." Substitute "Politics" for "Diplomacy" and consider what happens to "Truth" in War; and you soon realize what has happened to public discourse in America.

Great piece of valuable clarity pushing aside the SMOKE SCREEN OF "THE SURGE". Iraq is VIETNAM ALL OVER AGAIN. This war is nothing more than a deadly facade of the EVIL TRUTH. USA is finally showing the world how USA has no NATIONAL SECURITY threats in Asia, Middle east,Europe. The USA's National Security is threaten only when WE act as the GLOBAL POLICE. It is time to bring the troops home, circle the wagons and take care of business in the USA.

SEMPER FI AND GOD BLESS AMERICA

I believe Dale Carnegie had Writer Jeff Huber in mind; when he said this:

“Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do.”

GOP Presidential Nominee John McCain made these very accurate comments; a few weeks ago:

“I guarantee you this: If we had announced a date for withdrawal from Iraq and withdrawn troops the way that Senator Obama and Senator Clinton want to do, Al Qaeda would be celebrating that they had defeated the United States of America and that we surrendered,” “I will never surrender!"

Last Night; GOP Presidential Nominee said:

"America is at war in two countries, and involved in a long and difficult fight with violent extremists who despise us, our values and modernity itself. It is of little use to Americans for their candidates to avoid the many complex challenges of these struggles by re-litigating decisions of the past. I will defend the decision to destroy Saddam Hussein's regime as I criticized the failed tactics that were employed for too long to establish the conditions that will allow us to leave that country with our country's interests secure and our honor intact. But Americans know that the next President doesn't get to re-make that decision. We are in Iraq and our most vital security interests are clearly involved there. The next President must explain how he or she intends to bring that war to the swiftest possible conclusion without exacerbating a sectarian conflict that could quickly descend into genocide; destabilizing the entire Middle East; enabling our adversaries in the region to extend their influence and undermine our security there; and emboldening terrorists to attack us elsewhere with weapons we dare not allow them to possess."

I could apologize for "interrupting the 'bit@@ing' about America's efforts to PROTECT her Citizens;" --
But, I won't!

From A Proud Vietnam Veteran

get over it ugly , mccain will be the next president you can bet your *** on it

geeha that sounds like a good idea but if we withdrawal we become vulnerable for attacks inside the US....dont you get it, we are over there fighting to help another nation from deadly extremists, you cant just one day say ok guys we fought enough time to go home...mission not accomplished if that happens

marine are you sayin that we havent accomplished anything in iraq, if true you need to wake up

quote:

Originally posted by ColtsFootball18:
geeha that sounds like a good idea but if we withdrawal we become vulnerable for attacks inside the US....dont you get it, we are over there fighting to help another nation from deadly extremists, you cant just one day say ok guys we fought enough time to go home...mission not accomplished if that happens

Oh yes, the old "terrorists can't find us unless we lead them home with us with our departing forces" argument. You mean they don't already know where we are? You need to put down the kool-aid and step away from it carefully and start thinking instead of regurgitating the pablum you've been consuming these last few years.

Oh heck, I haven't said we didn't accomplish anything in Iraq. There are even a few areas, a very few areas, where we've accomplished a few good things, but they are mostly outweighed by the bad. Why don't you start doing a little research into this so-called surge? I'd suggest you click on the link I provided above and read the article from one who's been there and understands that this occupation - for that's what it is - is not about saving Iraq from extremists, but about trying to salvage the completely FUBARed mess WE made when WE invaded another country without just cause and decapitated its government with no viable plan for post conflict governmental administration and no exit strategy. The deadly extremists you refer to arose in the power vacuum WE created. There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before we created the environment for it. WE polarized the Sunnis and Shiites with our actions, and now we're arming both - I should say all sides - in this multilateral conflict. WE have empowered Iran to the point that Ahmadinejad feels free to go to Baghdad to hobnob with the Shiite-dominated, inept, corrupt, and constitutionally paralyzed government WE helped install. WE created the conditions in the Kurdish north which have led to an emboldened Kurdish resistance to the Turks which in turn led to an actual Turkish incursion into Kurdish Iraq only a week ago. It's just a matter of time before THAT area goes south, too.

The question isn't about our military capabilities. Our military won the war against Saddam. Our problem is we are losing the occupation. McCain keeps talking about winning. How do you win an occupation? The surge was supposed to be a temporary reprieve offered so the Iraqi government would have some "breathing room" and be able to meet the conditions set to justify the surge. Not a single one of the conditions has been fulfilled. Even the so-called de-Baathification law which surge supporters point to hasn't been read by the Parliament and there is nothing in place to implement its provisions. They've thrown us a few crumbs and declared us well-fed, and you're buying it.

I've got a client from the Dora neighborhood in Baghdad. A Shiite, she often complains to me that things were much better under Saddam. All of her relatives, friends, and former business associates have left the neighborhood and fled to Syria, Jordan, or Mexico - not the U.S. because in a reversal of our usual policies toward people in conflict-ravaged areas where we are fighting we are NOT offering asylum and the opportunity to immigrate even to most of the people whose lives are in danger because they cooperated with us. Her property is a bullet riddled shell occupied by Mahdi squatters. She and others have told me that there is a long history of intermarriage and cooperation between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq, but there have always been such as the Al Sadrs, the ones who are hyper-religious and combative. She's a secular, educated Shiite who married a Syrian Sunni. She keeps asking me why the people running this country are so ignorant of her people's history and culture. What can I say? That we are a country which, despite our access to education, prides itself on anti-intellectualism and jingoistic, ideology-based beliefs about other countries instead of actual knowledge? That we denounce those who take the time to learn about the complexities of other cultures as defeatists and anti-American? That we like everything simple and basic, and it's causing us to make stupid and costly decisions about our foreign policy and military strategy? Take a look at the neocon philosophy. It's about ideology, not about reality. It's about imposing our perceptions on others, not about properly perceiving reality.

I'm wide awake, young man. I suggest that you wake up and start questioning all those assumptions you have imbibed without serious reflection.

I too had many clients from Iraq, back before we invaded. The word from them was that Saddam was a monster, which is why they were all living in Dearborn, rather than Diyala.. and the welcome we got from Iraqi shi'ites in '91 was just as profound as that received by allied troops in Paris.. I guess it depends on who and when you ask..

quote:

Originally posted by godawgz:
I too had many clients from Iraq, back before we invaded. The word from them was that Saddam was a monster, which is why they were all living in Dearborn, rather than Diyala.. and the welcome we got from Iraqi shi'ites in '91 was just as profound as that received by allied troops in Paris.. I guess it depends on who and when you ask..

I can understand how much they despised Saddam. My client in fact despised Saddam and relates the hopes she and others had for improvement in 1991, but she also remembers how crazy everything became then. There was Shiite upheaval in some areas in 1991 which Saddam brutally repressed, but my client found the extremism and violence of the ones repressed more frightening than the repression itself. Of course, we urged the Shiites in the South to rebel against Saddam and then left them hanging. And in this instance we might as well have left them hanging given the extraordinary incompetence of our administration.

Lots of people were delighted that we got rid of Saddam. I remember the videos and the interviews of happy Baghdadis dancing in the streets, but we owed it to those people to govern competently and to ensure that a competent government replaced the one we removed. Instead, we mismanaged it all at every step. We put a 24 year old in charge of the Iraqi stock exchange, who had no experience in such management, based on his bona fides as a Republican party loyalist. We did not have a plan for the occupation and witnessed instead a pissing contest between Rumsfeld and Powell over who should govern. Neither the DoD nor the State Dept. had any viable plan for the peace. We invited contractors in on no-bid contracts, established no system of accountability or auditing, and shipped pallets of untraceable cash to the country to be handed out at will or stolen on impulse. We failed in our obligation to assure that if we removed the government of another sovereign nation we arranged something better to take its place.

Yes, and thru it all we are actually poised to succeed in spite of ourselves.. unlike Viet Nam where we butchered the first few years, and became so disgusted that we didn't even notice when we started getting it right.. of course draft vs no draft prob'ly explains to a large degree our increased patience this go around...

i just dont understand why people have forgotten what terrorists did on 9/11....it seems no one cares anymore and they just want to let it go....the main reason why people dont like bush is b/c he doesnt sugar coat anything, he has the most balls of any president ive seen and people mistake that for this "personal" war which i think is bogus....yea i understand the government does hide things from the public, but i think this is a little more serious than people realize, but dont get me wrong im against war unless its necessary, which in this case i think it is, for the safety of americans.

John McCain showed up today at the White House for lunch and a photo opt looking for instructions from Bush 43 how to continue the failed domestic and foreign policies of the Bush Administration.

But not to worry, either Hillary or Obama will be running the train and blowing its whistle after January 20, 2009. Republican Radio Host Rush Limbaugh is urging votes for Hillary to keep her in the race.

ColtsFootball18,

Did Saddam Hussein have anything to do with 9/11? I believe that's been proven no. If the answer was yes, President Bush would be yelling it loud and clear.

Tom4869,

Rush Limbaugh pounded John McCain back in 2000 so he can't say much in support of John McCain. The Democrats have their Rush quotes from eight years ago ready to fly.

quote:

Originally posted by ColtsFootball18:
i just dont understand why people have forgotten what terrorists did on 9/11....it seems no one cares anymore and they just want to let it go.... I haven't forgotten it. In fact, I remember it so well that I still get pretty angry and I wonder why we haven't gone after the guy who's most responsible, OBL, instead of focusing on nation-building and selectively bringing "democracy" to a country which had nothing to do with 9/11 ... the main reason why people dont like bush is b/c he doesnt sugar coat anything, he has the most balls of any president ive seen and people mistake that for this "personal" war which i think is bogus.... There's ballsy and there's smart. Being ballsy is only good if you're being smart. Otherwise, it's just plain arrogant stubbornness. And there's no mistake it's a personal war. His words are out there. He didn't have any compelling non-personal reason to do it, as we now know ... yea i understand the government does hide things from the public, but i think this is a little more serious than people realize, but dont get me wrong im against war unless its necessary, which in this case i think it is, for the safety of americans.

What makes you think people don't understand the seriousness of the situation? If you're against war unless it's necessary, why would you be a cheerleader for this unnecessary invasion and occupation of Iraq? It doesn't serve us any useful purpose, it's a huge drain on our blood and treasure, and it makes no strategic sense. Tactically it's a nightmare of colossal blunders and unforgiveable idiocy. How does being in this war achieve our goal of a safer America? We have made many new enemies and emboldened them to attack us because they can use the excuse that we started it. Iraq has made us less safe.

WOW!!! kudos to you MarineAuntie !!

I did'nt want to waste space by replying with your post quoted above, but it was brilliant. I am so tired of being labeled an unpatriotic liberal because I don't buy all the spin the Bush team tries to pass out.

I never understood why everyone buys that crap about "If we don't fight them there, we'll have to fight them here". Why?? If anything, our kicking their butt over there would probably be more of a catalyst for them to attack us here. That would be typical insurgent strategy; "we can't beat them here, so let's step up the attacks in the US to make public opinion force a withdrawal".
If we left, they would be too busy saying they drove us out and too busy trying to fill the vacuum we leave behind(if we did).
I'm not saying we shouldn't be kicking their butt or that we should just leave. I am just saying it's idiotic to say they would follow us home.
As for the surge- How dare Bush take credit for the limited successes it has achieved. For 5 years many smart people, from Shinseki to Powell to Zinni, among others, repeatedly said we needed more boots on the ground, but Rumsfeld insisted on war on the cheap. War on the cheap paid for by our soldiers lives.
Now he listens and finally sends in some of the extra troops that have always been needed and now he wants applause?? BS .

You know, you can be a patriot and love this country and serve in the military without buying everything that's handed out by Bush and Cheney.

Disagreeing with the Rush Limbaugh/Archie Bunkers of the media also doesn't mean you don't love America.

What is truly amazing is that as the Halliburtons and Bechtels and KBRs make billions on this war, and as we ignore the REAL war on terror in Afghanistan because the focus and resources are in Iraq, and as we see that our wounded warriors get second class service once they're back stateside, so many Vets, who should know better, still buy whatever comes out of Bush and Cheneys mouth. STILL you believe it. Amazing-
Why do we say we fight for our buddies? For the guy on our left and right? Because when you're in it, the political spin means nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by MarineAuntie:

quote:

Originally posted by ColtsFootball18:
geeha that sounds like a good idea but if we withdrawal we become vulnerable for attacks inside the US....dont you get it, we are over there fighting to help another nation from deadly extremists, you cant just one day say ok guys we fought enough time to go home...mission not accomplished if that happens

Oh yes, the old "terrorists can't find us unless we lead them home with us with our departing forces" argument. You mean they don't already know where we are? You need to put down the kool-aid and step away from it carefully and start thinking instead of regurgitating the pablum you've been consuming these last few years.

SNIP.

There is something to be said for giving the radicals someplace convenient to blow themselves up rather than in US cities. It is much easier for Abdul the camelfoker to bring his goat and dynamite vest to Iraq than it is New York.

And to be totally cold blooded about it, who would you rather see blown up, your friends and family or some faceless Iraqi half way around the world?