Abrupt US Withdrawal "Utterly Disastrous"

Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Nov 13, 2006.

  1. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,907
    Likes Received:
    295
    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200611/NAT20061113a.html

    Abrupt US Withdrawal Would Be 'Utterly Disastrous'
    By Mark Finkelstein
    CNSNews.com Correspondent
    November 13, 2006

    Excerpt

    Baghdad (CNSNews.com) - An abrupt withdrawal of American troops from Iraq would be a "disaster for Iraqis and for the region," Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister for National Security Dr. Barham Salih told Cybercast News Service in a one-on-one interview in his offices in Baghdad on Sunday.

    "Iraqis want to assume the lead in the defense of the security of the country," Salih said. "This is something that should be celebrated. But I think we will need American military support for some time to come."

    From his perspective as an Iraqi government official, Salih admitted that the current strategy in Iraq is "not working fast enough" for the Iraqis or for the United States. "Unless the natives of the land take charge, be responsible and defend the interests of the nation, the United States cannot help us," he said. He sees the U.S. role as helping Iraqis help themselves.

    Salih repeated that an abrupt U.S. troop withdrawal "would be utterly disastrous," but he also said he doesn't think that will happen.


    The Israelis agree.


    http://www.cnsnews.com/ThisHour.asp#Israeli%20PM%20Cautions%20Against%20Hasty%20US%20Withdrawal%20From%20Iraq

    Israeli PM Cautions Against Hasty US Withdrawal From Iraq

    EXCERPT

    Jerusalem (CNSNews.com) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has cautioned against a hasty U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq. Israeli officials rarely comment on the situation in Iraq, although analysts here have said that a premature withdrawal would be disastrous for the region. Asked how a U.S. withdrawal would affect the security of Israel, Olmert told Newsweek magazine, "If there is a premature pullout before Iraq has a robust government with a strong authority that can keep the country from collapsing into an internal civil war, America will have to think about the possible ramifications on neighboring Arab countries with moderate governments." In the interview, Olmert questioned how a U.S. withdrawal would affect the stability of moderate Arab countries, give the "radical forces that might flourish as a result of a premature pullout of America." Experts here have said that a premature withdrawal would only embolden radical Islamist elements and terrorists in the Middle East.
     
  2. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Define "abrupt"
     
  3. JamieinNH

    JamieinNH
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, you know Daisy.... Anything that goes against the Bush/Republican plan.

    <steps onto soapbox>

    Didn't you get the memo that the Republicans are the only one with ideas that might work? (even though they have messed up a good number of them so far)

    The Republicans are the only ones with any ideas that might work, so much so, that, even before the Democrats are in session, we are doomed...

    I see the election didn't change Carpro any.. Let the process work itself out. Let the Democrats come in with new ideas and do what they do, if it works, great! if not, then I would guess the American people won't vote for them again in 08.

    Either way, why all the harping about doom and gloom before they have even had a chance to show you what they want to do?

    Where is Pastor Larry screaming for us to wait and see what will happen. Where is the trust in God that he is in control no matter which party is in power?

    Carpro, you do realize that there is a bigger power than America, or the Republican party right?

    <step down from soapbox>

    Jamie
     
  4. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,907
    Likes Received:
    295
    You'll have to ask Dr. Salih.

    As for "hasty", you'll have to ask Olmert.

    Salih also said the current strategy is not working fast enough and seemed to lay the blame for that on Iraqis in general.
     
  5. poncho

    poncho
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    Invading Iraq was never a Bush/Republican plan. It was a neocon plan. We don't need anyone to tell us to wait and see what happens now, the dems will follow the same plan (with different rhetoric). They haven't got the guts to put the Washington Zionist lobby in check and put America's real interests first same as the republicans.
     
    #5 poncho, Nov 13, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 13, 2006
  6. JamieinNH

    JamieinNH
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know, you're right.. Sad but true.

    Jamie
     
  7. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    You got that right. There is not a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. At their best, they are pathetic.
     
  8. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Agreed. Don't see why the Zionist thingy was thrown into this thread, though.
     
  9. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ed's scenario:

    The Demos withhold cash, the US withdraws,
    the extra-national in-Iraq private armies attack
    Iran for nuclear weapons. Finding no nuclear
    weapons, the Iraqi occupiers of Iran kill
    every Shiite they can find (most of Iran, half
    of Iraq). Oil goes to $200 a barrel by 2010.
     
    #9 Ed Edwards, Nov 13, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 13, 2006
  10. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will start my bullet proof sun tan lotion company in the middle east also. Supply and demand baby!
     
  11. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bottom line, getting out quickly will be a disaster. Staying there has been a disaster. Slow withdrawal will be a disaster. Sometimes there are no good choices, only relatively less awful ones.

    It remains true, that most things in life are easier to get into, than out of. This is particularly true with regard to occupation of other nations.
     
  12. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,907
    Likes Received:
    295
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/w...age&adxnnlx=1163595829-5+k63t98iTuZ2h7+zFIPGw

    Military Analysis
    Get Out of Iraq Now? Not So Fast, Experts Say


    By MICHAEL R. GORDON
    Published: November 15, 2006

    WASHINGTON, Nov. 14 — One of the most resonant arguments in the debate over Iraq holds that the United States can move forward by pulling its troops back, as part of a phased withdrawal. If American troops begin to leave and the remaining forces assume a more limited role, the argument holds, it will galvanize the Iraqi government to assume more responsibility for securing and rebuilding Iraq.


    This is the case now being argued by many Democrats, most notably Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who asserts that the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq should begin within four to six months.

    But this argument is being challenged by a number of military officers, experts and former generals, including some who have been among the most vehement critics of the Bush administration’s Iraq policies.

    Anthony C. Zinni, the former head of the United States Central Command and one of the retired generals who called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, argued that any substantial reduction of American forces over the next several months would be more likely to accelerate the slide to civil war than stop it.
     
  13. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you had been alive in 1863... you'd have characterized the Union effort as a "disaster"... would you have quit?

    In the American Revolution, there was almost no good news until the end. The Americans lost almost every battle... would you have quit at Valley Forge?

    Had you been alive in 1942-43, you could have characterized the war against the might of the 3rd Reich unwinnable... would you have quit?

    The only thing that would make Iraq a "disaster" or "unwinnable" is proving the enemy right- demonstrating that we lack the will to make the sacrifices necessary to win.

    You might operate under the delusion that Iraq has nothing to do with the war against Islamists. Experts like Salmon Rushdie don't and neither does al Qaeda.

    They realize this is a battle of ideals and opposing worldviews... and not a battle between gov'ts and/or organizations. They share one vision- to make the world Islamic eliminating by conversion or force those who oppose them.

    Liberals somehow think this is Bush's fault or that they'll stop pursuing these aims if we reverse Bush's hard stance against them. The reality is they'll just be encouraged by that "victory" just as they were when the GOP lost in these past elections. They believe (and rightly so) that they have influenced the US Congress in their favor.

    They've read the history of Vietnam and know how that war was lost by the US... They and liberals are certainly on the same page of wanting to recreate that image.
     
  14. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Even yet we can snatch defeat from the very jaws of Victory.

    I paid for social programs for four other familes for 30 years.
    I ain't payin' no more; i live off the dole now :sleep:
     
  15. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am here. I am not sure why you brought me up. I don't feel the need to comment on everything. And given my current schedule, I had not even read this until now.

    I am not sure why you are expecting me to "scream for us to wait and see what will happen." There must be a joke or reference to something that I am missing.

    With respect to Iraq, we must stay there and win. Period. There are no options to avoid another Vietnam. For those who think this is a Vietnam, they are sorely deluded about history.

    To the second issue, I am not worried in the least. But having a soveriegn God should not lead us to irresponsibility. Nor does the fact that our hope is in Jesus and the church must focus on that prevent individuals from making wise choices.

    In Iraq, it would be foolish to pull out quickly. From Day 1, the plan has been what many are now suggesting: Let's train Iraqi troops and police, get the government on it's feet, and pull out. The way we go about that is open to discussion. The outcome should not be.

    The top general in Iraq apparently opposes a timetable. Will we let the general fight the war? Or will we impose a political position on him? The latter is what will lead to another Vietnam.
     
    #15 Pastor Larry, Nov 15, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 15, 2006
  16. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    mmm ... mmm ...

    Saddam's war machine tried that and when they failed . . . the Iraqis were militarily and economically superior to Iran . . . now that the reverse is true, I kinda doubt your scenario would work.

    But, you might have some insider news the rest of us do not have.
     
  17. hillclimber1

    hillclimber1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    I heard of a general that was speaking for all the generals in the field that concluded that we have the right amount of troops there, adn to add more would allow the Iraqi's to slack off on their police and military strengthening, and to withdraw or announce any withdrawal timetable will disallusion them.
    THe course we are on is working miraculously well and we should not tamper with it.
     
  18. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think we need to withdraw our troops from Iraq as soon as possible. It has been a disaster for some time now and there is nothing we can do to improve the situation except leave.

    Iraq is in the beginning of a civil war and we are in the way. The Iraqis are killing each other and American soldiers daily. If we leave, the Iraqi people will kill each other but will not be killing American soldiers.

    The is the result of Bush's folly in invading Iraq in the first place. If Bush had not listened to neocons like Cheney the U.S. might have made some more headway in the war in Afghanistan, and been in a better position for dealing with Iran and North Korea.
     
  19. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I respectfully disagree. I have no 'inside' information,
    i'm just a retiree who reads newspapers & the internet.
    IMHO the war in Iraq has saved the lives of 170,000 Americans
    in the last 4 years (during which time 560,000 unborn
    Americans have been slain). Either we fight the
    terrorists in Iraq or the USofA. The choice is NOT real
    hard.
     
  20. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Win what ? Is Iraq really our war ? I think Iraqis are not comfortable with the idea of running their own government, and deciding the course of their own history. They have gotten used to being under a dictator, having somebody they fear, having someone else tell them when to breathe, drink, eat, and dump. All they care about is Sunni vs Shiite, and they're willing to kill themselves for that, but they're not willing to fight for what our own soldiers are dying for over there - their freedom.

    What really are we trying to win ? Stuff Sadam down their throats, for all I personally care. What the heck do we care whether they're free, bound, or dead. They're not our people, they don't share our values, they don't speak our language.

    Let's bury our dead, lick our wounds, honor our troops, and get them back home, and never again send them to fight a war except in true, actual, and real defense of American freedom and American soil.
     

Share This Page

Loading...