Second War Has Begun

You can have a representative democracy where idiots vote in leadership...GW is proof of that.

The problem with a democracy in Iraq is that the people will vote in Islamic Clerics who will favor Islamic law over a secular constitution. After all, it is about the law and leadership, and their culture is different than ours. It is not about intelligence per say, it is about how they view their religion. We separated church and state as part of our foundation, that is not going to work there. Iraq was a secular state prior to our invasion...not because of a democratic process, but because a dictator made it that way.

If we dictate democracy, how is that different than the USA setting itself up as a dictator?

This nation building project is destined to either fail, or create a revolution in the Islamic world where they favor secularism over Islamic law and culture.

This is exactly why we are destined to fail in my opinion. They have to come to that conclusion on their own, we can't force it on them.

They have to choose democracy and a secular state over fundamentalism, we can't force it on them.

 

kinda like americans this november...

 

Believe it or not I am a registered Republican, but that's another story.

In any event, I have a problem with the Bush Administration for a number of reasons, and one of which is their total miscalculation regarding this War.

They botched the intelligence on WMD.
They based their whole reason for invading Iraq on aluminum tubes that the Dept. of Energy laughed at - - - remember the one's that Condi Rice stated were used expressly for uranium enrichment? And then they had that bogus report out of Niger about uranium, the one that was a fraud. And don't forget the British Intelligence "dossier" that Colin Powell held up so lavishly at the United Nations on February 5th, 2003; the one that was "plagiarized" by a grad student on Iraq, circa 1991.

The Defense Intelligence Agency found no evidence of WMD in Iraq ( this is a fact ) even though these analysts were under tremendous pressure by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz to "find" something and yet the Bush Administration continued to "prostitute" the CIA for their own behalf, which is gonna have severe repercussions on our intelligence agency ( that is suppose to be INDEPENDENT I might add ).

The Bush Administration failed to listen to their very own Army Chief of Staff, General Shinseki who a year ago stated that several thousand troops would be needed for post war Iraq. Paul Wolfowitz stated that General Shinseki was "wildly off the mark". Yet, we now see a consensus that 320,000 troops will be needed. Hmmmm . . .

I stand by former NSA Brent Scowcroft's philosophy of containment regarding Saddam Hussein. You remember Scowcroft don't you? He was the NSA for George Bush Sr. and he advocated not stirring-up a "hornets" nest and diverting our attention away from terrorism and al-Qaida back in August of 2002. Unfortunately, Cheney and Karl Rove didn't listen to him, and now we are looking at a people that are gonna be force-fed democracy even though the odds are that they will feel more secure with what they know best, and that is fundamentalism and a theocracy.

Again, a huge miscalculation by the Bush Administration.

But no, the mental-midgets and partisan morons on ET can't see that because for them it is always about the old "liberals vs right winger" debate that is so dull and tiresome. What a shame.

Pray for those young American boys in the tanks.
They need to come home safe and sound.
Enjoy Life.
Peace.

 

Surely you do not think the War on Terror is unwinnable and not worth fighting? ART, say it ain't so! Without hope there is only despair.

But despite your understandable trepidation as we stand seemingly alone in the midst of chaos, we are and shall always be the Shining City on the Hill. And just as we saved humanity from the twin evils of Nazism and Communism in the last century, so too shall we save the world from the insidiousness of blood thirsty Militant Islam in this one.

So cheer up, have a beer, and be thankful you're an American, for our victory in this war is as close to a sure thing as MSFT calls expiring worthless.

 

HD, beautiful post.

I have no doubt that many Bush-haters, not all, would like to see us flee Iraq merely for the opportunity to ostracize the President. Obviously the past lessons of our fleeing with our tails between our legs once the body bag count rises, which only emboldens our enemies, has no impact on their thought process, or they simply don't care.

 

So this is what it's really about for you?

It's about a freaking popularity contest and helping to allieviate any embarrassment or ostracism of our President and not about young American soldiers dying for an unworthy cause with no exit strategy?

You are truly an idiot.

 

Think me an idiot if you like. I care as much for your opinion as I do about what brand of toilet paper to wipe my ass with.

But no, this is not what it's really about for me. Whatever gave you that idea?

You need to reread my post. I didn't say ALL Bush-haters, I said MANY (I even underlined the word), would like to see the US lose the war in Iraq and leave. If you're not among the many, bully for you.

You see it as an unworthy cause with no exit strategy. You're entitled to your opinion.

My opinion? Well, I agree with much of what Sen. John McCain said yesterday on the Senate floor:

Madam President, I take the floor to respond to comments made by Senator Byrd, but also to general comments that have been made over the last 48 hours as we all recognize this is a very difficult time for us in Iraq.

I do not have to review with any of my colleagues the events of the last few days and the tragedies in the loss of these brave young Americans who are fighting and sacrificing for someone else's freedom.

I have also heard a number of observers, including some Senators, who have compared events in Iraq to what we went through in Vietnam. I happen to know something about Vietnam, and I know we do not face another Vietnam. I need not go into the long history of our involvement in that nation, the reasons for our failure, but the realities on the ground in Iraq are clear.

There is no superpower that is backing these minority of Shias and Sunnis who are seeking to gain political power through the use of a gun, and there is no comparison as far as the sanctuary which this enemy has. We grant them no sanctuary.

Some have stated we are on the defensive. I would argue that, as we speak, in Fallajuh and other places, our Marines and Army are on the offensive, dedicated to the proposition that no group, no matter what their ethnic or religious beliefs are, will take control of Iraq.

Control of Iraq will be the result of a democratic process and a representative one, part of which is the turning over of power to the Iraqi people on June 30.

We have had this argument back and forth: Should we turn over power of the government to the Iraqis on June 30? I say yes, and I say yes recognizing two realities. One is that it will be a difficult process, and we have a lot more planning to do between now and June 30 for that transition to take place. The other reality, as far as the security situation is concerned, is that America's military will be there in force for a significant period of time, and the American people need to be told that.

This is a long, tough, hard struggle. It is hard for countries to adopt democracies. It is incredibly difficult when they have never known democracy and freedom in the past. A little later, I want to talk a little bit more about what happens if we fail, as well as what happens if we succeed in Iraq.

Again, in Vietnam there was superpower support. There were arms and political support. We did not have a clear plan for victory, and dare I mention that in Vietnam many times we had more casualties in a week, sometimes less than a week, than we have had in a year in Iraq.

To make these comparisons with the Tet offensive or the entire Vietnam conflict is not only uninformed but I think a bit dangerous because, of course, the specifics of our involvement in that conflict fade, as they should, in the memories of the American people.

What is happening in Iraq today is we have a Sunni insurgency that consists of ex-Baathists and Saddam loyalists. They obviously are the only people who were better off during Saddam Hussein's regime because they were the favored minority that were of the same religion as Saddam. They realize they will never run Iraq again because they are in the minority. Because they are in the majority, the Shia will probably dominate that government, but we also have a constitution in Iraq that guarantees the rights of minorities. We are there and a new government will be there to guarantee those same rights.

The realities are the Sunni minority will never control Iraq again. We have a small minority of Shias who are trying to grab some political power before the July 1 transition. There is very little doubt that Sadr's followers are in a distinct minority and the majority of Shias still owe allegiance and have allegiance to the Ayatollah Sistani, who has argued, perhaps not forcefully enough, that we do not have the kind of armed conflict that we are seeing today.

Is this a difficult political problem? Yes. Is it the time to panic, to cut and run? Absolutely not. The vast majority of Iraqi people are glad we are there and they state unequivocally that they are better off than they were under the regime of Saddam Hussein. Lest time dim our memory, let us remember the mass graves that we discovered, the 8- and 9-year-old boys coming out of prison in Baghdad, the despotic, incredibly cruel practices of his two sons. The people of Iraq and America and the world are better off with Saddam Hussein gone.

Now, we can argue about intelligence; we can argue about weapons of mass destruction. That is why we have commissions. That is why tomorrow, in an almost unprecedented fashion, the National Security Adviser to the President will testify before the 9/11 Commission. I am confident she will perform admirably because she is an incredibly intelligent and capable individual.

The fact is, to argue that we should have left Iraq under the rule of this incredibly cruel person who used weapons of mass destruction, who had weapons of mass destruction in 1991, was continuing to attempt to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and if in power would continue to try to acquire those weapons, certainly flies in the face of the facts about Saddam Hussein's regime.

Senator Byrd says we should not have gone into Iraq in the first place and that we should not be there now. I respect the view. I strongly disagree with it, and I think the facts indicate that is not the case. We could argue for days about it, but right now at this moment we need to send a message not only to the Sunnis in Iraq and the minority of Shias in Iraq who are taking up arms and killing Americans that we are there to stay. We are there to stay and we will see it through. If we fail, if we cut and run, the results can be disastrous. Those results would be the fragmentation of Iraq, to start with, on ethnic and religious lines. The second result would be an unchecked hotbed of training ground and birthing of individuals who are committed to the destruction of the United States of America.

We will never solve the war on terror as long as there are millions of young men standing on street corners all over the Middle East with no hope, no job, no opportunities, no future. They are the breeding ground. They are the ones who are taken off the streets and taken into the madrasahs — funded by the Saudis, by the way — and taught to hate and kill, and who want to destroy America, the West, and all we believe in. Their hatred is not confined to the United States of America, as the citizens of Spain have found out, much to their dismay and tragedy.

What happens if we win? What happens if we see this thing through? It will be hard and it will be difficult and perhaps we need more troops. I have said for a long time that we needed more troops of certain types, but we have to see this thing through. And what will happen? What will happen is that we will affirm the profound and fundamental belief upon which this Nation was founded, that all men and women are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and they are not just in the Western Hemisphere; they are not just in the United States of America; they are not just in Europe. The people in the Middle East have the same hopes, beliefs, and yearnings for freedom and democracy, and they have a right to determine their own future just as have our own citizens and citizens throughout the world.

When they achieve that — and it will be long and hard and difficult — it will send a message to every despotic regime, every religious extremist throughout the Middle East, their day is done because in a democratic, free, and open society the people want to live in peace with their neighbors and with the world.

So there is a lot at stake. I grieve every moment, as every American does, for the loss of these brave young Americans' lives. They have made a supreme sacrifice, and we will honor their memory, but at least their grieving families will know they sacrificed in the cause of freedom.

At this particular moment of crisis — and it is a crisis — I urge all of my colleagues and all Americans to join together in this noble cause. Yes, we are free to criticize; yes, we are free to make recommendations and suggestions; but the awesome responsibility lies with all of us, led by the President of the United States, as we attempt to carry out what is the most noble act that no country in the world has ever done besides the United States of America, and that is to shed our most precious blood and expend our treasure in defense of someone else's freedom in the hope that they may enjoy the fruits of a free and open society in a democracy that is guaranteed to all men and women by our Creator.

 

You make a pretty HUGE assumption if you think that these muslims, most of whom are illiterate, will be embracing "democracy" anytime soon and not the theocracy that they have known all of their lives.

You are obviously much more of an idealist than a realist.

By the way, can you please tell me where we are going to get another 200,000 troops to help support post war Iraq? Right now we have 130,000 there and need to get the number up to about 330,000

Chief of Staff General Shinseki said a year ago, and many people now have come to understand that what he said is in fact true, that we need several thousand troops in post war Iraq. Can you please tell me where these troops are going to come from?

I'm listening.

 

Where are we going to get the troops? After Bush is re-elected, he will re-institute the draft.

 

If you think that these Muslims will be embracing democracy when we turn the Country back over to its people and the Iraqi Congress at the end of June, then I got a great piece of real estate that I know would be just perfect for you.

You'll love it.

Oh, and where are those additional 200,000 troops coming from again? And how much more will this cost us???