Posted by ? on November 18, 2005 at 23:19:27 (PST):
In Reply to: Re: War posted by Speaking Just For Me on November 18, 2005 at 23:09:24 (PST):
: : : :
: : : : : Right on Mr, Murtha, bring those boys home!
: : : :
: : : : So you think we should just leave entirely before the job's done? So then what are you gonna say in another 8 years when we have to go back in a THIRD time to get the mess straightened out? That is if we are still here. Maybe in that time those insugents will get organized enough to get some RPG's and shoot them into Hienz field God only knows what they'll be capable of if they can get control of that country. We went in to do a job and wether you agree with that or not that job has to be COMPLETED or every life lost over there will have been in vain. Then we'll end up loosing another bunch to clean it up again.
: : : : If you say you are against the effort entirely, here's how I look at it.
: : : : -We (and NATO we thought at the time) had laid down terms at the end of the 1st gulf war that inspecters would be allowed to search and confirm that they were not developing the WMD's.
: : : : -Saddam had been refusing to let these inspections to take place for years. We gave him ultimatum after ultimatum after ultimatum.
: : : : -Our country was attacked.
: : : : -At the time of the attack Iraq was STILL refusing to allow us to go in and inspect. On this issue many people say "Well, what do you expect? If you were running a country would you allow another country to come poking around whenever they wanted." That's what happens when you loose a war, you are then forced to abide by the terms of the country that won the war. At the end of WWII Japan was forced into unconditional surrender, this basically meant that they had lost and had to do whatever we told them. What do you think would have happened if a few years after WWII Japan tried to tell us that we couldn't come into their country?
: : : : -No we didn't find any WMD's. Don't you think that Saddam could have easily gotten rid of them sometime between the 1st and 16th ultimatum we gave him? After all, it has been a major contention that all these bombs are coming from massive stockpiles of explosives that the insurgents SOMEHOW removed from the bunkers they were in and SOMEHOW have kept hidden from us for 2 years WHILE WE WERE OCCUPYING THE COUNTRY!
: : : : -We are still there now because we need to make sure that the government Iraq has now can maintain control of the country. They cannot do that yet.
: : : : -Everyone keeps talking "exit strategy" and "time frame". The exit strategy is leaving when the installed government can maintain control. The time frame is when this job is done.
: : : : -Pulling everyone out now will only lead to chaos , our return in the future and even more casualties.
: : : : We all want them home safe, but not at the cost of abandoning the cause. Not at the cost of future lives.
: : :
: : : The same old conservative spin. How long have the Palestinians and Jews been fighting, forever, you are right and that is how long we will have to stay in Iraq. There will be no end. There probably won't be another stable government in Iraq for who knows how long.If they can't govern themselves how can they defend either.You can speculate and blame who you want but it is pitiful when a country that has as much technology and firepower as we do and we can't defeat a few thousand insurgents.No one is saying leave now in defeat but surely we can set up some goals ( timetables) that we need to achieve to be able to leave.Bush has no plan, don't be so stupid to believe you are going to defeat every terrorist in the world by fighting in Iraq.Do you think the terrorists are all in one spot battling the U.S.? There probably are some cells here now in the U.S. just waiting to attack.
: : The "TIMETABLE" is when they have a viable military force. What is so hard for you people to understand about that. What you said was
: : "Right on Mr, Murtha, bring those boys home!"
: : Murtha wants to withdraw all the troops right now. That have the same effect as leaving in defeat.
:
: There they go, again...manipulating the truth. Murtha NEVER said that, and I challenge anybody to find that in any link or article out there in the cyberspace, even FOX News. He NEVER said that. He said at a time appropriate we should redeploy and pull the forces out but not leave the region and let the Iraqis govern on their own. He said as long as the U.S. presence is there in Iraq, the antagonism will grow.
: I think your argument is wrong, but you are free to post a link to prove me wrong. Please post where he said he wants our troops out now. Feel free to post the link. Did you even read his proposal? That is the question.
No, as a matter of fact I didn't read his proposal. Let's look at what you just posted though...."pull the forces out but not leave the region and let the Iraqis govern on their own. He said as long as the U.S. presence is there in Iraq, the antagonism will grow."
How do you propose to "pull out but not leave the region"? If he feels that "U.S. presence" is the problem what else do you think he feels should be done? We gotta stay. Leaving right now will ruin everything that's been accomplished.