Do you get the feeling that we’ll still be chatting about the deteriorating condition of Iraq and how we have to get really, really, really serious about changing direction? And of course, the “responsible” folks will once again dismiss the idea that least worst solution is getting the hell out.
From now on, when someone says “It’ll be much worse if we leave” make them explain how. That phrase has been used so much, it’s a cliche now, and the best you can get usually from those that use it is “Well, the terrorists wil be emboldened and follow us here.”
I can’t bring shampoo on an airplane, the government knows if I like aisle or window, yet the “terrorists” will follow the marines home.
–WKW
pedugger’s staring at each other in shock: “What the HELL do you mean The Decider is no longer in a position to keep chanting ‘Stay the Course’?”
I say it will be much worse when we leave, because sectarian violence could very well escalate into genocide without a presence of force here. The Iraq government will collapse if we leave. There are many people who will be executed because of helping the CF. The murder and kidnapping rate is high, and it will go higher with us gone. Most people who say we need to pull out now, have no familiarity with the tribal tensions here. Those tensions far exceed religous tensions here.
Most people who say we need to pull out now, have no familiarity with the tribal tensions here
Of course they do, DK…
They don’t care.
It’s called left – wing racism.
I say and have said it will be worse (as opposed to much worse) if we leave, also.
Instead of the sporadic violence you have now, there will be systematic, near genocidal levels of violence as there was under Saddam. Another Iran/Iraq war may come about. To say nothing of terrorists, emboldened (and enriched – the $ will flow) by surrender of the great Satan, increasing their attacks on a perceived weak US.
Given that the Iraq invasion had no real connection with the War on Terror until we went there, you can blame Bush if our percieved “surrender” emboldens the terrorists.
FD: Left-wing racism. Now you’re really straining.
The proper response to falling into a trap is to get out of it. Bin Laden thought Afghanistan was going to be the trap (as it was for the Soviets), but we dodged that one. And then we jumped into Iraq like it was a good idea. Bin Laden WANTS us bogged down in Iraq. He’s the one winning as long as we’re there.
Dkelsmith | Dec 8, 2006 5:51:25 AM
“I say it will be much worse when we leave, because sectarian violence could very well escalate into genocide without a presence of force here. The Iraq government will collapse if we leave. There are many people who will be executed because of helping the CF. The murder and kidnapping rate is high, and it will go higher with us gone. Most people who say we need to pull out now, have no familiarity with the tribal tensions here. Those tensions far exceed religous tensions here.”
Years later, it’s clear The Decider Administration did a fantastic job of organizing a successful invasion.
Dkelsmith, I’m not questioning that we can’t simply leave Iraq. I am saying that following the midterm elections, The Decider is no longer in a position to smugly chant ’stay the course or you’re with the terrorists’ with that smirk like he knows exactly what’s going on and the rest of us are idiots.
You reference people who may be unfamiliar with tribal tensions in the area … The Decider probably didn’t even know where Iraq was on the map before giving the thumbs up to start his slam dunk invasion.
it’s fascinating the sliding Iraqi casualty scale we seem to have. Right now, with our troops in country, to even call what’s going on now a civil war is an outrageous accusation for a jihadi-loving media. But if we leave, and Iraqi casualty rates jump, say, 10%, we will vault straight over civil war directly into “genocide”. And then, of course, in not immediately calling whatever is going on at that point a genocidal bloodbath engendered by cut-and-run Defeatocrats the media will be guilty of more liberal bias.
WOw, Rheinhard, you win today’s wingnuttia award.
All in the same post!
“Outrageous Accusation by Jihadi-loving Media”
“Liberal Media”
“Cut-and-run”
“Defeatocrats”
Get your head out of GOP-FOX propaganda and start thinking again, man. The Mid-term Elections are OVER. You LOST. America decided AGAINST you. All your base are OURS.
Continuing the charade is pointless, as Rush Limbaugh himself basically said in relief at not having to lie for the Administration any more.
Now, just like in the Congress, real Americans who put America above party are going to have to pick up the pieces of broken china and try to solve the massive problems left behind by you and your band of GOP Conservative partisans.
But how in the world are we going to work to work together if you can’t even get past calling people names?
Short Answer: We’re not.
People like you are part of the problem, and will fight any solution. As a famous American once said “LEAD, FOLLOW, or GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY.”
You and yours have shown an extreme inability to do any of the above.
I think somebody’s sarcasmometer needs to be retuned.
If we leave I have no doubt that things will get worse. Of course they are getting worse now with us there.
I was rather chilled by Christopher Dickey’s recent column in
Newsweek in which he suggests that one of the possible outcomes of us staying in Iraq is that eventually, as conditions deteriorate, we are going to be forced to choose sides:
On the one hand it’s encouraging that Bush is meeting with some of the players in Iraq to work a negotiation but unfortunately, this guy also took the opportunity to threaten the Sunnis and deny the existence of Shiite death squads.
If this is one of the “friends” we’ve been forced to choose in Iraq then we will become ever more complicit in the atrocities that occur. We will be aiding and abbetting the genocide now being decried.
If that happens, I guarantee you that Dugger will come back here and tell us that “People die in war” and the left has to stop counting up the Iraqi dead if we’re going to win. “Still 10,000 short of total dead under Saddam,” he’ll say because in his moral math over a million Iraqis could die next week and he’d still support the war.
Two options in Iraq:
1. Lots of people die, American troops die, we stay in Iraq unable to respond and fight to terrorists
2. Lots of people die
Neither is a good option, but #2 is the best.
No. Two options in Iraq:
1. Stay the course: American soldiers continue to die (but at a decreasing rate – a rate much lower than Korea and Vietnam) and violence continues, probably slowly ebbing in the region.
2. Withdraw regardless of theater conditons:
Americans soldiers no longer die. Violence grows stronger in the region, overall death total strongly surpasses previous combined (all) death total. Terrorism increases worldwide and against US. BTW: Region destabilizes much more, oil prices soar, econmomy tanks.
As I said before, there ain’t a single easy answer any place. Staying the course is the probable the least painful alternative.
Another thing to think about is the role that Iran and Syria are currently playing in Iraq, and what that role will turn to later on, regardless of whether or not we have a pullout from Iraq.
wellstone, great post…you make it clear that you have NO idea what to do. Your post completely ignores the whole question…take your own advice and “lead follow or get out of the way…” You win the “Most Irony-Laden Post” of the year award.
And Ollie, you know of course that in an average year in the US we lose more people to influenza and pneumonia than we have lost in Iraq in 4 years, right?
“… violence continues, probably slowly ebbing in the region.”
Neither past experience nor current reality bears this out, fugger. This is another example of fantasy thinking on your part: Simply staying will solve the problem.
“And Ollie, you know of course that in an average year in the US we lose more people to influenza and pneumonia than we have lost in Iraq in 4 years, right?’
And, h*ll, lets go ahead and ruin frame’s weekend. Per the AP, as of early Dec 2006, the US has lost 2,901 service people in Iraq. The last three years of reported homicide deaths by the LA County coroner indicates 3,518 – within the confines of LA County.
I demand Geoge W Bush get us out of LA County, now! A strategic withdrawal, I call it – but get out. We’re not going to change conditons there. Let the 18th Street gang and the LA Crips fight it out.
As to Iran and Syria, how will our withdrawing impact them?
They’re obviously already exerting great, negative influence on the situation. If we pull out will that influence grow stronger? Does it matter? We’ve already ensured that Iraq will end up run by a pro-Iranian, Islamist regime.
Which is to say, again, that many of the possible consequences of withdrawal which are touted as reasons to stay, have already happened or are already happening.
Invading Iraq and getting rid of Hussein accomplished two things: It strengthed radical elements in Iran and it ensured that Iran would be the dominant influence in the region. That’s a done deal and there’s no undoing it unless we want to throw out the current Iraqi government and install our own strongman in its place.
Is that where this is all headed?
“I demand Geoge W Bush get us out of LA County, now!”
That’s got to be the Scotch talking again. What an idiot.
More people have died falling off ladders in this country in the last 10 years than have died from Islamofascist terrorism.
See, you guys aren’t the only ones who can throw out ridiculous comparisons without any visible point.
Dugger, you do realise you just implied that Iraqi lives don’t matter as much as American lives, if at all?
Smith:
We have questions about shuckalotta. Scroll down to Dec. 5 and check the comments thread on the post “Pencils and Chocolate.”
The question is: What kinda chonklit?
@ Smith
Ooops. Nevermind.
I have your direct reply in hand. We’re on the job.
So, since Iraq is so safe, you boys are deploying in the morning to meet up Dkel, right?
I’ll do it the minute that you, Ollie, stop using any fuels that emit greenhouse gases…oh, and stop eating any methane-producing foods too….
Nimmer,
Exactly the opposite. Its you and frame that evidently value brown skinned lives less. As I have pointed out several times, teh death rate and death total for locals was much higher under Saddam and before Bush. If we leave, I think a Saddam clone returns and genocide returns. We’ll save US lives – but what about the Iraqi people Nimmer? OK for Saddam II to murder them by the boatload as before?
Let me be the first to congratulate Oliver Willis on being nominated for a Webby Award in the “Stupidest Comments by Trolls” category.
It couldn’t have been easy assembling such a group.
–WKW
“OK for Saddam II to murder them by the boatload as before?”
Dugger, there is every possibility that we’ll end up putting “Saddam II” in power ourselves to restore order. It won’t be the first time we’ve done it.
Again, my position is that one more innocent Iraqi life lost in this conflict is too much.
Your position is that a million Iraqis could be killed tomorrow and the war would still be “worth it.”
Now tell me again who values life more?
Saddam may have been evil, but he was more adept at holding the country together than the bush/rummy/dick three stooges of nation-building have been.
Oliver, I also get the feeling that in six months, brainless borg such as the Marpedrugger Continuum will still squat in their holes and blame all of Bush’s fuckups on us.
Shorter Dugger: “I know you are, but what am I?”
Not very convincing, Dugboy.
Nimmer,
Nevertheless. You stopped arguing content completely and degraded to juvenile taunting.
Again: why do you support more brown skinned people dying in the Mideast?? Its what happened before and its what is likely to happen when we leave.
The way your mind works fascinates me.
I second your fascination, Nimrod, and raise it by my fascination and enjoyment of the inane, childish level of pedugger’s arguments since the midterm election.
Prior to the election, it was all about numerous cocky, arrogant posts in virtually every thread about how well The Decider’s administration would fare going forward.
Now, pedugger can barely muster the energy to kick sand in our faces.
Buma says”Saddam may have been evil, but he was more adept at holding the country together than the bush/rummy/dick three stooges of nation-building have been.”
Yea and there you have it. The old Mussolinni “but the trains ran on time” argument. Beautiful example of the liberal idea that as long as everyone is EQUALLY miserable the system is ok. Freedom for some to live their lives better is worthless.
Sell your souls for safety lefties, sell your souls….
And I rest my case! LoL!
“why do you support more brown skinned people dying in the Mideast?? Its what happened before and its what is likely to happen when we leave.”
Dugger before you ask this question one more time you’re going to have to explain how this jobes with your own measure of the war’s success based on the comparisons to the numebr of people Saddam killed. Again, according to your logic a million more Iraqis could die in this conflict and you would still rationalize it as “Still better than Saddam.”
You are willing, in other words, to accept a great deal more horror than anyone on the left here is willing to.
hey frame.
Its very simple. You ‘ought’ to get it. The total death rate for people in that region -per year- was higher under Saddam than it is now – post Saddam. The overall total under Saddam, regardless of rate, was much much much higher under Saddam. If we had left Saddam in place, its fair to assume he would have continued to be Saddam and murder at the same rate. Also its fair to assume that if we leave in defeat, a Baathist or similar murderous authoritarian will seize power, make the trains run on time, and murder millions – again.
And I don’t measure this war’s success by casualties. I merely point out the absurd situation of liberals having voted for war and caterwalling about casualties. I insist on knowledge of history at least. And I insist that if leftists and go along-get along republicans prevail on surrender, they at least understand the likely price brown-skinned people will pay for their weakness.
And as far as I am concerned, our soldiers won the war (being major combat) part – we may lose the post-war part.
“And I don’t measure this war’s success by casualties.”
So you don’t really care how many Iraqis die do you?
You’re awesome Fugs. Just awesome.