CUT AND RUN

[txswinner]

All I hear is cut and run dems.

The last time this country did the right thing, vietnam, wasn't the administration Republican. The most shamed president Nixon was in office when we cut and ran.

This may have been the only thing he ever did following the demands of the American people.

Just as this crud in Iraq, We did not belong there, should not have been there and were not ever going to win there.

Why could we not win? Because we had no plan or goals as to what would identify victory and no plan to get to the goal. Sound Familiar?

 

[PW2]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Interestingly, I know of very few dems (no office holders) that want to "cut and run"
It is yet another hollow administration phrase, like "Stay the Course".

Most dems are for a phased redeployment, and a recognition that Iraq is in the middle of a civil war, where we have no business being in the middle of.

There are of course no simple or good solutions or options to this mess we got ourselves into. Repubs want the dems to come up with a solution that they can criticize, rather than face the reality that they got us into this, and that our current plan "Stay the Course" has zero chance of achieving any positive result. At some point, we will have to face the reality that what we are doing can't work. I'm not sure whether it will take a few hundred or a few thousand more casualities, but it will most assuredly come.

 

[crunch]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Most dems are for a phased redeployment

Oh, that's rich... we aren't retreating, we're just going to advance to the rear!

 

[Vlad D Impeller]

Re: CUT AND RUN

All I hear is cut and run dems.

The last time this country did the right thing, vietnam, wasn't the administration Republican. The most shamed president Nixon was in office when we cut and ran.

This may have been the only thing he ever did following the demands of the American people.

Just as this crud in Iraq, We did not belong there, should not have been there and were not ever going to win there.
quote]



You left out that it was a Democratic congress which cut off the funding for the war, Nixon hands were tightly tied.

 

[txswinner]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Not sure how soon the new Congress will be able to rein in the runaway administration.

 

[crunch]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Not sure how soon the new Congress will be able to rein in the runaway administration.

Kindda got your cart before your horse don'tcha? The elections are still a few days off.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Vlad says:You left out that it was a Democratic congress which cut off the funding for the war
Well hopefully the newly elected one will do the same.....JK

 

[txswinner]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Vlad, Been there and saw first hand the war in VN. I would like for the Dems to get the credit for ending it. However, the actual plug pulling credit goes to Nixon and that is the only thing I know of positive about him.

 

[txswinner]

Re: CUT AND RUN

The future will tell us if the Dems learned from VN or not. We first entered under a Rep. adm. (Eisenhower) then held during Kennedy only to escalate under LBJ. Heaven forbid that happens on this case but is that not what is being talked of today. More troops to Iraq to win.

Those are war cries from the 60's.

BRING HOME THE TROOPS, whatever it is called.

 

[gonefishie]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Anybody saw the 60 minutes on Sunday about the military hospital in Iraq where they treat soldiers and Iraqi? They told the story of a soldier who got injured, third degree burn from an explosion I think, who ended up dying anyway. It cost the government, I meant us taxpayer, and I quote "conservatively figured over a million dollars" trying to save that soldier. My point is that we didn't have to waste all that money and that guy didn't have to die.

 

[Terry Olson]

Re: CUT AND RUN

I have to disagree just a bit if I may PW2.

First, the Dems phased redeployment plan is a withdrawl - plain and simple. Either you're for a withdrawl or you aren't. If we withdraw too soon the administration we tried to take out of power will regain control of the county albeit with new figure heads - and our losses will have been for nothing. The only other redeployment option that exists is to send in more support and take the entire country. We could do it if we were to deploy that way but taking the country over isn't what we intended to do to begin with.

Second, the shift in power that lead to the civil war was a direct result of our aggression in Iraq - which was the intended result. We initiated the civil war and we have an interest in the outcome of that war. We need to remain to ensure that the ultimate objective is met.

Third, I've always believed that those who criticise should be prepared to offer what they feel is a better solution. All I hear from the Dems is vague "let's get our people out of harm's way" with nothing said about how we can do this without abandoning the original objective and that's where their "plan" falls short.

The day after 9-11 support for the military actions we ultimately took was very strong but many don't have the resolve to see it through - which is what this administration is doing. Remember, it wasn't only Repubs supporting the military aggression.

What we hear going on now is purely political. If public support for the military aggression were still as strong as the day after 9-11 the Dems would be preaching an entirely different sermon.

Let's not forget why it is beneficial for a change in power in Iraq. It's not about oil, and that should be obvious given fuel costs. It's not about freeing the people of Iraq although that is one of the positive results. It's about taking a government that is supporting terrorism out of play, which will greatly hinder the resources terrorists have to attack us with.

Ask yourself one question: Did the terrorists intend to attack us just once every 5 or 10 years? Most would doubt this. Why haven't we seen another 9-11? It's obvious to me that we're successfully applying the premise that the best defense is a good offense. Again, I have mixed feelings about our still being there but when I ask myself this question I don't see how the alternative is better.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Is it just me or does anyone else find it tiresome to continually see Rehub. explanations (excuses) linking the invasion in Iraq to our response in Afghanistan, post 9/11.......
The facts have bourne out that all of the reasons put forth for the Iraqi invasion by this admin. were either lacking or blatently false.....
The only thing that doesn't, "Stay the Course", is the 'true plan', (if there ever was one), or the reasons why we are there.......:|
I've been working at the V.A. for over a week, & it is truly sad to see those young men & women shot up, missing limbs, etc.:'(
When was the last time Dubya, Cheney or Condi set foot in Iraq, BTW?......:$......JK

 

[Kwas]

Re: CUT AND RUN

BRING HOME THE TROOPS, whatever it is called.


It's called CUT & RUN Txswinner, no matter how you and PW spin it.

 

[PW2]

Re: CUT AND RUN

First of all, Terry, disgreeing with me on this board is not allowed. Did you not read the fine print?

I'm teasing, of course. Seriously, redeployment is not the same as withdrawel. We have to remain in the region, we have to foreign fighters and alQaida types and the like from running over the country.

If civil war was what we wanted (which I don't for a minute believe) we certainly got it. There is no chance supporters of Saddam take over--if anyone takes over it will be from the Shiite majority there and followers of Sadr, which will align themselves (and already has) with Iran and Hezbollah. That (hopefully) is not what we wanted. As bad as Saddam was, he was an enemy of Iran, which was helpful to our interests. Now with Sadr we have a real problem from a regional point of view.

And you are correct in one thing, everyone (90+%) in the US after 9-11 supported going after the people that did attack us, and the Taliban who supported them. Even the world in general was with us.
Then we attacked Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9-11, and everything changed.

And to make it infinitely worse, we did it with seemingly little planning and complete incompetence, with the idea apparently that it would be easy.

And now we are stuck with the results. There are no do-overs in this world, and we have to live with the situation as it exists.


In poker, they call it putting good money after bad. It's a bad idea.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Oh now I get it. We're not Running Away, we're redeploying to another part of the world. Well not that you put it that way, Running away is fine.

duh!!!


I guess that explains how murder is just "termination of an unwanted pregnancy". Or a "viable tissue mass"

I guess this goes a long way to explaining how preferential treatment based on race isn't racism, it's leveling the playing field.

I guess this goes a long way to explaining how property owners rights can be ignored in favor of the rights of an insect. All men created equal?

I guess this goes a long way to explaining how government can take someones home and give it to someone in the name of "economic development". Welcome to the collective.

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re: CUT AND RUN

No, apparently you don't 'Get It'....
At all.....

 

[PW2]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Pointer, you crack me up!

This whole election is based on the theme from Democrats: "Had enough?"

And Pointer jumps up, like the waif in the old movie "Oliver":

"No, sir, I want some more!!"


Hopefully, you will be in the minority.

 

[ricksrster]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Remember, the President said we were going to take the war to the terrorists. It is better to fight them there than to fight them here. Sadam was a terrorist. He supported terrorists. He had to go. As far as the terrorists crossing borders into Iraq, so be it. They're not in the USA. Our goal should be to kill more than they can breed.
Take a good look at the positives that have been a result of the Iraq war. People have freedom in Iraq.
The bad guys want to take it away from them and we shouldn't let it happen.

 

[12Footer]

Re: CUT AND RUN

All I hear is cut and run dems.

The last time this country did the right thing, vietnam, wasn't the administration Republican. The most shamed president Nixon was in office when we cut and ran.

This may have been the only thing he ever did following the demands of the American people.

Just as this crud in Iraq, We did not belong there, should not have been there and were not ever going to win there.

Why could we not win? Because we had no plan or goals as to what would identify victory and no plan to get to the goal. Sound Familiar?

This defines the term "troll".

It would be a hoot to reply to it, but you know what they say about feeding these things.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: CUT AND RUN

Funny how some of the enlightened people can mince words and it is fine.

I am so glad we have folks here that can help me understand the difference in redeploying 5000 miles away and simply running away like beaten cowards?