Clinton wants all U.S. troops out of Iraq when Bush leaves office

[Gaffer]

so if law enforcement enters the town in search of the morotcycle gang, they should just slaughter everybody.... yeah...that's the American way, isn't it? NOT

If that were the "American way", there would be streets named Wounded Knee and My Lai and Haditha.

Why do you always have to take things to the extreme? I never said a thing about what would be done. I simply stated that the town that allows thugs to take up residence and doesn't do something about them would be considered as tacitly supporting the thugs. How does that imply slaughtering the whole town?

[Grumplestillskin]

I've never seen "your plan", here or anywhere else. If I had, how could I possibly say "you don't have a plan"?

The plan is to get out and let them eat themselves. Gonna happen anyway, no matter how long the US stays there..

I also support the Hells Angels.

Why does that not surprise me...

[Pale Rider]

Why does that not surprise me...

Hey... it comes with the territory. Among other professions, I'm a Master Harley Davidson Technician. I know Hells Angels, I make their bikes go fast, and I ride with them. You have to be "voted in" just to RIDE with them. It's an honor. Many of them are friends and good people. They HAVE asked me to patch with them, but, my loyalty is with Harley Davidson, and I'm not wrenching on anybody's bike for free.

[retiredman]

Why do you always have to take things to the extreme? I never said a thing about what would be done. I simply stated that the town that allows thugs to take up residence and doesn't do something about them would be considered as tacitly supporting the thugs. How does that imply slaughtering the whole town?

do you support eradicating insurgents in Iraq?

[retiredman]

Ah, we are now cruising toward middle ground...bravo!

Of course, the devil is in the details. Unfortunately, all strategic plans tend to look great right up until the moment one begins to apply the tactical slant necessary to support such plans. That is true of whatever plan one can examine (the democrats/libs/neocon ad nauseam). Then of course, everyone gets to "vote" on the plan almost before it is even made public. Whether you espouse immediate withdrawal or "staying the course" and anywhere in between, each plan has the possibility of success and an equal possibility of failure. Each plan is dependent upon the price the US and its citizens are willing to pay.

no...each plan does not have an equal possibility of success or failure. some plans are better than others and have a better chance of success than others.

And I do not know what this middle ground is you speak of.... I do not think that America ought to sink to the level of our enemies and I do not think that America needs to spill the blood of ITS young men and women to fight for everyone ELSE's freedoms

[CSM]

no...each plan does not have an equal possibility of success or failure. some plans are better than others and have a better chance of success than others.

And I do not know what this middle ground is you speak of.... I do not think that America ought to sink to the level of our enemies and I do not think that America needs to spill the blood of ITS young men and women to fight for everyone ELSE's freedoms

We are essentially in agreement on your last statement. As to the first, each plan, until it is executed starts with an equal chance of success or failure because NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE OTHER THAN PLANNING. It is after it gets to execution that the balance changes. My point is, the plans being offered as alternatives to the current one remain untested. It is easy to denigrate a plan that is under execution; compare it to a plan that is in concept and declare the concept "better".

Personally, I have stated several times that I do not think the US military should ever again be utilized to interfere with, protect or otherwise support any other nation...period. Not because I have some moral inhibition against war. It is simply because I do not believe the citizens of this country will ever again have the commitment required to see such efforts through to the end.

I would infer from your statement about "middle ground" that for you personally, there is no middle ground. Are you saying that you are positively correct and therefore anyone opposed to you must be positively wrong?

[retiredman]

I am all for finding consensus... but, if you put yourself in a liberal democrat's shoes - especially one who rightfully believes he has something to add to the debate about middle eastern policy - and you have been as marginalized and trivialized as we have for the past four years.... you can see how we might get the idea that consensus is only now anything the right is interested in... now that they've lost their mandate.

[CSM]

I am all for finding consensus... but, if you put yourself in a liberal democrat's shoes - especially one who rightfully believes he has something to add to the debate about middle eastern policy - and you have been as marginalized and trivialized as we have for the past four years.... you can see how we might get the idea that consensus is only now anything the right is interested in... now that they've lost their mandate.

Understood. There is plenty of room for fingerpointing and blame throwing. I have an learned (and deep) distaste for politicians in general (in either party).

It is my personal conviction that both political parties have been hijacked by the extreme left/right (pick your poison and as appropriate) and that there is plenty of snobbery and hypocracy on both sides. I sincerely hope that the US citizenry wakes up soon and realizes that NEITHER party is particularly interested in what is good for the country but rather interested in achieving and maintaining power for its own sake. I am not saying that either party is all bad but neither is either party "all" right.

We elect officials to serve the people...ALL the people...not just the gays, not just the Christians, not just the hawks, not just the unions, and not just corporate America. Somehow, that has all been lost (in my opinion).

That aside, formulation and execution of a plan for Iraq and US involvement/non-involvement MUST be free from political hackery. The whole issue is far too important to be relegated to use as a tool for either party to achieve mere political ascendency. I seriously doubt that such a plan will ever see the light of day...which is very, very sad.

[retiredman]

"That aside, formulation and execution of a plan for Iraq and US involvement/non-involvement MUST be free from political hackery. The whole issue is far too important to be relegated to use as a tool for either party to achieve mere political ascendency. I seriously doubt that such a plan will ever see the light of day...which is very, very sad."

It is my belief that political hackery has been the essence of the current plan since day one. Look at who were the big cheerleaders for this war and look at their rosy pronouncements and prognostications...this war was ginned up in the PNAC laboratory and its salesman have been hawking it (double entendre intended) since 9/12/01.

[CSM]

"That aside, formulation and execution of a plan for Iraq and US involvement/non-involvement MUST be free from political hackery. The whole issue is far too important to be relegated to use as a tool for either party to achieve mere political ascendency. I seriously doubt that such a plan will ever see the light of day...which is very, very sad."

It is my belief that political hackery has been the essence of the current plan since day one. Look at who were the big cheerleaders for this war and look at their rosy pronouncements and prognostications...this war was ginned up in the PNAC laboratory and its salesman have been hawking it (double entendre intended) since 9/12/01.

Once again, it appears that you believe that NOTHING in opposition to your views could be anything but wrong. I do not believe that, so obviously there is little point in pursuing this debate.

I do believe that mistakes have been made in the prosecution of this war; I do believe that the MSM and others have gone to great lengths to make failure in Iraq a self fulfilling prophecy. I also believe that the some in this country are more opposed to the sitting President simply because he is not a Democrat and Iraq is a convenient issue with which to beat the aforementioned. With that, I leave you to further pursue your agenda.

[Grumplestillskin]

I do believe that the MSM and others have gone to great lengths to make failure in Iraq a self fulfilling prophecy. .

The media have had NO affect on the war itself. On the minds of people at home, sure, but most people don't need the media to tell them a fuck up when they see one...

I also believe that the some in this country are more opposed to the sitting President simply because he is not a Democrat.

I'd say it's more to do with him being an idiot and a puppet than any political affiliation.

[CSM]

The media have had NO affect on the war itself. On the minds of people at home, sure, but most people don't need the media to tell them a fuck up when they see one...



I'd say it's more to do with him being an idiot and a puppet than any political affiliation.

I disagree...the media has done a fine job of advancing the cause of the anti-Bush crowd as well as disseminating the terrorist propaganda. Obviously, you don't see it that way.

As for "him being an idiot and a puppet", I am sure you reached that conclusion based on sound and objective reasoning without your personal politics entering into it...right?

[retiredman]

Once again, it appears that you believe that NOTHING in opposition to your views could be anything but wrong. I do not believe that, so obviously there is little point in pursuing this debate.

I do believe that mistakes have been made in the prosecution of this war; I do believe that the MSM and others have gone to great lengths to make failure in Iraq a self fulfilling prophecy. I also believe that the some in this country are more opposed to the sitting President simply because he is not a Democrat and Iraq is a convenient issue with which to beat the aforementioned. With that, I leave you to further pursue your agenda.

I believe that invading Iraq was a terrible mistake. I believe that the invasion of Iraq has made us LESS safe, ity has made us MORE despised, it has made us FEWER and it has made us POORER and it has created MORE enemies and more adherents to the very cause we were supposedly seeking to destroy after THAT cause, and not Iraq, attacked us on 9/11... and I would believe ALL of that JUST as strenuously if a DEMOCRAT had done it ALL.

[Gaffer]

I believe that invading Iraq was a terrible mistake. I believe that the invasion of Iraq has made us LESS safe, ity has made us MORE despised, it has made us FEWER and it has made us POORER and it has created MORE enemies and more adherents to the very cause we were supposedly seeking to destroy after THAT cause, and not Iraq, attacked us on 9/11... and I would believe ALL of that JUST as strenuously if a DEMOCRAT had done it ALL.

Our being in iraq has nothing to do with our enemies increasing. That's taught in the mosques and by the imams of islam. It's all iranian and al queda inspired. If iraq is mentioned its just as an excuse. The more they send into iraq, the more we kill. They have 1.2 billion to draw from and most of them hate the US because the US is not muslim. As long as your not muslim you are going to be hated by them.

[Gunny]

No, only officers are smart enough to have that power. They and the MSM, along with folks like Cindy Sheehan should be the ONLY ones with any say. In fact, we should not allow enlisted personnel to vote either!
then you are saying something I certainly don't agree with

34K Iraq civilians died violent deaths last year. Guess how many violent deaths there were in the US last year!

34K in a country whose total population is 28M. Are you suggesting that, if we had a little sectarian problem here in America...a little north versus south or liberal versus conservative or caucasian versus all the other races.... and that little sectarian problem resulted in 360 THOUSAND Americans dying last year of violent deaths directly resulting from that sectarian conflict, are you suggesting that wouldn't be a CIVIL WAR?

However, whenever anyone suggests that enlisted service folks are stupid or in any way second class or imply such, they need to be taken to task. You need to learn how to read the running context of a thread, buddy. avatar said:
"Obviously the troops think its going well or we wouldnt have record reenlistment. Shouldnt they be the ones who can tell if we are doing well?"

and I suggested that NO...they should NOT be the ones who tell us how to run a war.

Enlisted servicemen and women have every right to their opinion; as much right as every single anti-war protestor and MSM talking head and politician. And yes, even as much right to their opinion as retired Navy commanders! Yes, they even have as much right to vote as any other citizen in this country. I have never suggested otherswise.... I just do not think that we make our determinations as to how a military operation is doing in terms of meeting its objectives or furthering some strategic goal by polling the troops

Thank you Capt Sobel for putting in your own words what a couple of us have been saying all along. You're an elitist officer who thinks of enlisted personnel as lesser forms of life.

A good leader ALWAYS listens to his troops, and seeks their input. That's number one.

Number two, senior enlisted personnel are NOT "troops." We teach you officers how to do your damned jobs without getting everyone including yourselves killed.

I guarantee you every senior enlisted person I know is at a minimum as educated, and probably far more than you when it comes to battlefield strategy and tactics and the conduct of war.