If we leave Iraq, do we lose for good?

[Logan13]

I hope you don't get yours from Fox News???????

Make no mistake about it. We will leave Iraq with our head hung in shame just like Vietnam, and there will be even more serious consequences than 9-11from this.

This would make you happy, wouldn't it. When you invest in defeat, you expect a return..............

[eliteforce]

This is a non-sense, the US is not making any money off Iraq's broken oil infrastructure, it's billions wasted every week- the entire pipeline grid in the north of the country has been halted and the insurgents smuggle and graft oil money at an alarming rate-which means Iraq's oil is used to kill US troops everyday-oh yea thats something worth fighting for..oil is just a commodity like rice..and as a matter of fact Vietnam exports $1.6 Billion Dollars of rice a year, so you could have just as easily said "blood for rice"
Oil is a commodity available all over the world and Iraq's oil production declined after the invasion helping to push the price at the pump up but ultimatly refining capacity has what has really driven prices up-a commodity-there is no real strategic value to holding a country just because it has some good reserves.

YOU ARE WRONG, does the US still have bases in Vietnam?


Vietnam = rice patties

Iraq = oil

Any questions?

We are not there because corn is their major crop.

[Joemeek]

After World War I, the oil companies carved up Iraq. Shell, BP, Exxon and Total all had stakes in the Iraq Petroleum Company. They paid pennies for each barrel of oil and built a pipeline to take it away.

In 1972 the Iraqis nationalised the industry and threw the foreigners out. From then on Western oil companies could only dream of Iraq's oil reserves - the second largest in the world.

With Saddam Hussein came decades of war followed by sanctions and Iraq's massive reserves lay largely untouched. But with Hussein's regime under threat, at last there was a chance to get back in.

Some could say 911 was the great opportunity to get there and get the oil.
I would not like to think it was but you can't say that was never discussed.

[ROBOCOP]

For what its worth, as a brit, the "war on terror" can and never should be ignored. Like yours our country is under threat every day since the attrocity of 9/11. Yes, we have always been under threat with our soldiers in Northern Ireland and many lives have been lost as a result of IRA bombings. But the IRA threat of which we have lived with for a considerable part of my life has never impacted on me like 9/11. My wife works for an airline and was in NY at the time the planes went into the towers. I fell to pieces, knowing that she was due out of JFK that day. Watching those pictures of what could have been my wife, drove me crazy. No one knew what airline, or who or why!!!!! I couldnt get in contact with anyone who could give me answers. As it unfolded I was truly ecstatic when I realised the airline involved was not that of my wifes. The euphoria didnt last long though. Reality of those who died so unnecessarily brought guilt of my good fortune home. What happened still haunts me to this day,,,,,why,,,,Im a brit, why should it bother me???? The fact is, I love America, all that it stands for and the patriotism you embrace so openly. Should we in Britain have gone to war, being the much needed allies of our friends. Your damned right we should. We are plagued with threats of more terrorist attacks in doing so but surely we cannot give in to acts of mindless cowardess and slaughter. I realise lives are still being lost from both USA and UK. Opinions here in the UK differ on the rights and wrongs, much the same as yours I expect. I do not see this war as a means of monetary cost or gain. I see it as two countries fighting for what we have done for centuries and that is a peaceful society free from terror. I applaud all those involved in the war over in iraq and afghanistan and I humbley respect those who are against our involvement. My gratitude to those who have suffered. Peace everybody.

[BgMc31]

I am sick of you and others bringing up Bush's rating, but not Congress'. Congress' is the lowest in history, and yet you speak nothing of it. What's getting old are the obtuse statements and mindsets....... News flash for you. The dems will not take the Whitehouse in 2008, they do not have anyone who can win outside of the democratic nomination. Anyone who thinks that they do is living a fairy tale. What does this mean? It means that I have to hear you whine and wring your hands for another 4 years, at least.

Funny Logan that even your beloved Fox News is reporting that likely voters (both Republican and Democrats) would choose either Clinton or Obama over the Republican frontrunner Guiliani.

[Mogamedogz]

Man I cant stand Guiliani. PLEASE dont let that man win!!

[BgMc31]

For what its worth, as a brit, the "war on terror" can and never should be ignored. Like yours our country is under threat every day since the attrocity of 9/11. Yes, we have always been under threat with our soldiers in Northern Ireland and many lives have been lost as a result of IRA bombings. But the IRA threat of which we have lived with for a considerable part of my life has never impacted on me like 9/11. My wife works for an airline and was in NY at the time the planes went into the towers. I fell to pieces, knowing that she was due out of JFK that day. Watching those pictures of what could have been my wife, drove me crazy. No one knew what airline, or who or why!!!!! I couldnt get in contact with anyone who could give me answers. As it unfolded I was truly ecstatic when I realised the airline involved was not that of my wifes. The euphoria didnt last long though. Reality of those who died so unnecessarily brought guilt of my good fortune home. What happened still haunts me to this day,,,,,why,,,,Im a brit, why should it bother me???? The fact is, I love America, all that it stands for and the patriotism you embrace so openly. Should we in Britain have gone to war, being the much needed allies of our friends. Your damned right we should. We are plagued with threats of more terrorist attacks in doing so but surely we cannot give in to acts of mindless cowardess and slaughter. I realise lives are still being lost from both USA and UK. Opinions here in the UK differ on the rights and wrongs, much the same as yours I expect. I do not see this war as a means of monetary cost or gain. I see it as two countries fighting for what we have done for centuries and that is a peaceful society free from terror. I applaud all those involved in the war over in iraq and afghanistan and I humbley respect those who are against our involvement. My gratitude to those who have suffered. Peace everybody.

Just like I asked the other UK resident on this thread, how's the idea of fighting them in Iraq so you won't have to fight them on your home soil working out for ya?

[BgMc31]

[QUOTE=Logan13]

Is Al Queada in Iraq now?

Is Al Queada in Pakistan? Is Al Queada in many parts of North and Eastern Africa? If we are going to fight them, by your logic, we should be fighting them everywhere right?

[Joemeek]

Just like I asked the other UK resident on this thread, how's the idea of fighting them in Iraq so you won't have to fight them on your home soil working out for ya?

It's nothing to do with fighting on your own soil, has history not taught you anything about brutal dictators if you just turn a blind eye ?
Is it just a case of, we'll leave them to it as long as they don't bother us.

[ROBOCOP]

Just like I asked the other UK resident on this thread, how's the idea of fighting them in Iraq so you won't have to fight them on your home soil working out for ya?

Dude. You gotta be joking right?????? I take it that you dont approve of our help, however insignificant you feel it is/was. Why badmouth a brit when he gives a response in support of all opinions on the "war against terror" in Iraq?

Please tell me I misread what you said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BgMc31]

It's nothing to do with fighting on your own soil, has history not taught you anything about brutal dictators if you just turn a blind eye ?
Is it just a case of, we'll leave them to it as long as they don't bother us.

Are you speaking in terms of brutal dictators we used to support or just generally bad guys in general. BEcause if that is the case, Saddam was just a thug with no ties to terror organizations. There are far more dangerous and destructive men out there that we aren't taking care of... i.e North Korea and Iran. Please quit trying to justify this war.

[BgMc31]

Dude. You gotta be joking right?????? I take it that you dont approve of our help, however insignificant you feel it is/was. Why badmouth a brit when he gives a response in support of all opinions on the "war against terror" in Iraq?

Please tell me I misread what you said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This isn't something I joke about. I'm not badmouthing a brit, nor am do I disapprove of your help. The fact that your are jumping on the Iraq bandwagon when it's been proven that Iraq had no ties to terrorists is foolhearted. Blair regrets his decision to blindly follow Bush into this war and his popularity took the hit because of it. As a matter of fact, the overwhelming majority of your country is against the war in Iraq (not the war on terror, there is a difference), even moreso than our country.

If I misread your post then I apologize, but it seems that you are on board with the war in Iraq. The reason I brought up the attacks on the UK is because that is the main justification used by this administration for our presence there. Supposedly if we fight them there we won't have to fight them on our own soil. But that has not proven true for the UK.

[ROBOCOP]

This isn't something I joke about. I'm not badmouthing a brit, nor am do I disapprove of your help. The fact that your are jumping on the Iraq bandwagon when it's been proven that Iraq had no ties to terrorists is foolhearted. Blair regrets his decision to blindly follow Bush into this war and his popularity took the hit because of it. As a matter of fact, the overwhelming majority of your country is against the war in Iraq (not the war on terror, there is a difference), even moreso than our country.

If I misread your post then I apologize, but it seems that you are on board with the war in Iraq. The reason I brought up the attacks on the UK is because that is the main justification used by this administration for our presence there. Supposedly if we fight them there we won't have to fight them on our own soil. But that has not proven true for the UK.

Bro The main essence of my input wasnt a bid to show my approval or disapproval on the war in Iraq. I do have to admit that the "weapons of mass destruction" were never found but could we as a Nation sit back and let Saddam commit mass genicide over and over again without lifting a finger to help? Yeah, Hans Blic should have been given more time, we were all screaming for that over here, but they went ahead anyway! My other point was to mention how the 9/11 attacks affected me and with good reason. Im not having a dig at you bro, I respect everyones opinion. And again for the record,,,the opinion of those who support the war and those who are opposed to the war IMO have equal merit.

[king6]

Logan we aren't going to get attacked more then we have been since the country was born... Sending troops to foreign countries for bullshit reasons (Iraq was never linked to 9/11, nor were there WMD's... Bush just wanted revenge for his daddy) is only going to increase the hate towards America, and not having a thorough plan what to do after our so called "victory" was just stupid on Bush's part... Bush has clearly gone way beyond FUBAR on leading our country and instead has dug us a big deep hole that the next President is going to have to get us out of! Hopefully we'll get another Clinton in to fix things up... After all, the only thing you Conservatives have on Clinton is his little act with you know who... And so what if he lied about it? I have no right to know about his personal life, and it in no way affected his leadership skills which were quite high up on the par, not to mention how great of a speaker he was as opposed to the current world-fumbling President we currently have. So if you're going to say Bush is better then Clinton, compare them first... We actually had a surplus of money, and weren't 25 trillion in debt, most of the world liked us, he was a great speaker, and I believe one of the greatest President's of all time! Oh speaking of Bush, I found a very interesting image of him...

Don't you want to join the military? I don't see why you would if you feel this way. Or are you doing it for the college money?

[king6]

You know how Bush and Clinton differ? Bush had the balls to stand up to someone. Any other Democratic president after 9/11 would have just had everyone join hands in a circle and sing "give peace a chance". He did what everyone else was afraid to do. Maybe they didn't have WMD, but they were a threat. And Bush didn't show up at my door step with a gun and force me to join the Marines. I joined, I volunteered to go to Iraq. Besides, I hear the dems complain about the Bush administration, but do they offer solutions? No. They just say get out of Iraq. There was a reason that the republicans held the house and senate for so long, and they will have control again.

[Logan13]

Funny Logan that even your beloved Fox News is reporting that likely voters (both Republican and Democrats) would choose either Clinton or Obama over the Republican frontrunner Guiliani.

ah yes, and the polls showed that Kerry had won the last presidential election as well. And as Dan Rather stated about the closing polls, "They have never been wrong since they were tracked". The funny thing is that Fox is reporting this, I thought that they slanted to the right...........

[Logan13]

[QUOTE=BgMc31]

Is Al Queada in Pakistan? Is Al Queada in many parts of North and Eastern Africa? If we are going to fight them, by your logic, we should be fighting them everywhere right?

So your answer is "Yes, they are in Iraq"? Why not try dealing with the present and future? I'll bet that you still listen to Debarge and Cindy Lauper don't you. Move on Bg, move on!

[Logan13]

Is it just a case of, we'll leave them to it as long as they don't bother us.

Unfortunately, many naive liberals do think this way.
Liberal mentality:
Global war on terror = bumper sticker
Global warming = let's have a concert in support of it, and all of us should start driving bicycles around.

Liberals are the ones painting the "Doomsday scenario".

[Logan13]

Linksys

Once banned, always banned.

Hey, your profiling..............

[Logan13]

You call me ignorant... I call you Delusional... works for me. In the end, you're just spinning your wheels trying to create a dust cloud of BS. I could pick apart your weak attempt to discredit my understanding of what "no bid" contracts are, but it would be pointless. Obviously you are too brainwashed to ACCEPT what they have done. You actually compared adultery to initiating an "unprovoked" invasion of a country... how can anything you say after that be taken as credible? Sane people don't think like that. Fanatical nut-job's do.

BTW: The answer is a BOOMING "YES". Dicksmoker Cheney and his friends made more money as a result of this war than anyone. I guess by their calculations (appox) 4,000 US lives (and counting) were well worth it. I wonder how many of them have kids over their fighting to CREATE MORE...err... "Stop" ()Terrorism.

You are ignorant of the facts. Nothing you have said proves otherwise. Again, can you point to one other company that does what Haliburton does?

[king6]

Funny Logan that even your beloved Fox News is reporting that likely voters (both Republican and Democrats) would choose either Clinton or Obama over the Republican frontrunner Guiliani.

Obama wont be in the run for much longer, he is about to be indicted for his dealings with the mob a few years ago when he profited several hundred thousand dollars off of a land scheme. And no one will vote for Clinton, she is too damn shady. I think McCain has the best chance, he is a republican, but is liberal enough for the dems.

[king6]

Unfortunately, many naive liberals do think this way.
Liberal mentality:
Global war on terror = bumper sticker
Global warming = let's have a concert in support of it, and all of us should start driving bicycles around.

Liberals are the ones painting the "Doomsday scenario".

I think I love you Logan.

[Carlos_E]

Obama wont be in the run for much longer, he is about to be indicted for his dealings with the mob a few years ago when he profited several hundred thousand dollars off of a land scheme. And no one will vote for Clinton, she is too damn shady. I think McCain has the best chance, he is a republican, but is liberal enough for the dems.

Do you have a link to back this?

[king6]

Do you have a link to back this?

This is what happened, the Illinois states attorney is going to try and tie Obama to this.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/3...bama24.article

[DNoMac]

How do you win against an enemy that isn't afraid to die, has no regard for human life, and truly believes everything we stand for is evil? Unless we turn the whole region into a parking lot, I don't see how it's possible to win.

If your truly interested, you should read into the beg of Special Forces and General Bill Yarborough. It's completely unconventional tactics, quite the opposite of creating parking lots with heavy warpower. The basic philosophies go back to Mao Tse-tung which is about respecting the indigenous people in an attempt to win over their support. Using propoganda to weaken the enemies moral. It's essentially winning over the civilians, not killing as many guerillas as possible. It could be debated forever whether or not this method would work in Iraq (or any method). However, this clearly isn't a conventional war.

[Flagg]

What would you have us do, GIVE UP?

You say "would you have us give up" like there's a possibility Al Queda can be beaten. They are not like the IRA, this organisation can't be threatened or reasoned with. Would you have Bush invade every country that has terrrorist cells operating within them?

[Joemeek]

It's not helping matters when half your country is against this war, for it's only giving more detrmination to the other side, i see it as only making these people want to kill more and more when half the country they're fighting appears to be on their side (in their eye's).

[Joemeek]

Please quit trying to justify this war.

Do you think Bush, Blair went to war, throwing away American and British lifes for nothing and they have that much disregard for their soildiers ?
Or could it be that beacause you think it's being lost that you're against it ?
Maybe if "you" thought we were winning, your opinion woudl be different.

[Carlos_E]

This is what happened, the Illinois states attorney is going to try and tie Obama to this.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/3...bama24.article

No where in the article does it say this guy is associated with the mob or there is a plan to indict Obama.

???

This article is from April. It is now almost August. Why haven't we heard anything?

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/3...bama24.article

Obama: I didn't know about Rezko problems

BY TIM NOVAK Staff Reporter/[email protected]

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama said Monday he accepted campaign contributions from Antoin "Tony'' Rezko without knowing that Rezko was a slumlord with problem buildings in the state Senate district Obama represented at the time.

"Should I have known these buildings were in a state of disrepair? My answer would be that it wasn't brought to my attention,'' Obama, who's seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, said at a South Side campaign stop.

His comments came in response to a Chicago Sun-Times report that he had done previously undisclosed legal work between 1995 and 1998 on a series of troubled low-income-housing deals involving Rezmar Corp., owned by the indicted businessman.

Obama worked for a small Chicago law firm -- Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland -- between 1993 and 2004. The firm worked on deals that got $43 million in government funds for 15 apartment buildings Rezmar rehabilitated with not-for-profit community groups. Four of the buildings ended up being foreclosed on.

In all, Rezmar rehabbed 30 buildings. A third of those were in the Illinois Senate district Obama represented between 1997 and 2004. Many of the buildings fell into disrepair and financial straits while Obama was state senator, prompting the city to repeatedly sue over problems including no heat.

Obama, a friend of Rezko for 17 years, said he often got complaints as a state senator about housing problems. But, he said, "As far as I can tell, we were never contacted by Rezko tenants."

Obama got more than $50,000 in campaign contributions from Rezko, Rezko's family, his businesses and business associates between 1995 and 2004, records show.

"Mr. Rezko gave me campaign contributions,'' Obama said. "While I was a state senator, he had buildings in my district that apparently were not managed properly. I had no knowledge of that at the time.''

Obama said he did just five hours of legal work on Rezmar projects.

[BgMc31]

Do you think Bush, Blair went to war, throwing away American and British lifes for nothing and they have that much disregard for their soildiers ?
Or could it be that beacause you think it's being lost that you're against it ?
Maybe if "you" thought we were winning, your opinion woudl be different.

I can't speak for Bush or Blair, but I don't believe Bush's goal was a benevolent one. Blair just went along for the ride because he always followed Bush without question.

I was against the war (in Iraq) from day 1. Whether we are "winning" or "losing" is irrelovent. There was no reason to go into Iraq. The excuses used were bogus and they changed after WMDs and a link to Al Queda wasn't established. After those excuses failed, it changed to getting the big bad Saddam Hussein out, comparing him to Hitler and such. Again, I knew from day 1 there was no military solution to Iraq. So there isn't any way to 'win'. Since you obviously support the war, what is the definition of victory? Staying until Iraq has a stable government? Ending all sectarian violence? Neither of these situations are viable. Even if it were, it would take 10+ years to stabalize that country. Should we stay for an additional 10 years and risk even more American lives.

Again, our focus is screwed up. We would have a better chance in Afganistan (where the real terrorist threat is) if our military focus was there.

But like Logan says, we are already in Iraq so now what? I'm not for an all out pullout in Iraq. But we need to redirect our focus to training and fighting Al Queda and defending Iraqi borders from foreign fighters. We could do that with 1/4 of the numbers of troops we have there now. Our presence in Iraq should be modelled after our presence in Korea.

[Logan13]

You say "would you have us give up" like there's a possibility Al Queda can be beaten. They are not like the IRA, this organisation can't be threatened or reasoned with. Would you have Bush invade every country that has terrrorist cells operating within them?

Certainly you have a better solution than just packing up and going on the defensive. I'll bet that you were easily bullied in school, weren't you......?

[Flagg]

Certainly you have a better solution than just packing up and going on the defensive. I'll bet that you were easily bullied in school, weren't you......?

Nice assumption, how old are you again Logan?

[Logan13]

Nice assumption, how old are you again Logan?

Then don't leave things to assumption. You either have a better solution or you don't. Whining about the current state of affairs is not a solution. But it is obvious from your posts that you are easily swayed and prone to just giving up. Maybe if you hide under your bed, the bad guys won't find you.......

[eliteforce]

The other side is always going to be more determined because they are on the other side...of the world-where that country is, they will always fight until their country is liberated from foriegn control..and the people who are "on their side" is not half, it's 65 or 70% of American public want US out of Iraq..and it's only going to get worse as the spiraling costs of this disaster start to effect the average american more and more..at most the US can continue the occupation into 2009 and your dreaming if you think the situation by then will be any different, it hasn't changed in 5 years and it's not going to change in 3 more..
You keep talking about winning but you can't solve the most fundamental political issue -that the Iraqi security forces will not stand up, unite under the command of the premier/cabnet/parliament and take over the country because they see the installed central government as foriegn occupation 'puppet' and the Iraqi population itself has no respect for the installed government, and the insurgents and militias are entrenched among the general population. Time is not on Americas side on this issue-America has less domestic support in Iraq than the Soviets did in Afghanistan or the US did in Vietnam.

It's not helping matters when half your country is against this war, for it's only giving more detrmination to the other side, i see it as only making these people want to kill more and more when half the country they're fighting appears to be on their side (in their eye's).

[Flagg]

Then don't leave things to assumption. You either have a better solution or you don't. Whining about the current state of affairs is not a solution. But it is obvious from your posts that you are easily swayed and prone to just giving up. Maybe if you hide under your bed, the bad guys won't find you.......

And it's obvious from your numerous posts that you're nothing more than a redneck bigot, but that's my assumption.
You know I seen this happen a few times now, where just cause you don't agree with someones post you get snotty and the thread then decends into a tit for tat argument.

[Logan13]

And it's obvious from your numerous posts that you're nothing more than a redneck bigot, but that's my assumption.
You know I seen this happen a few times now, where just cause you don't agree with someones post you get snotty and the thread then decends into a tit for tat argument.

Redneck....never been called that, but that comment could be skewed as racist/ethnic to those from the deep south. That is not allowed on this website, no matter the group being slurred.
Regardless. Stupid is as stupid does/says. I call it like I see it. I am able to draw a conclusion about your character based on what you say. If you don't like my assumption, perhaps you really just do not like who you are.......

[Fat Guy]

Logan I think the main intention of this thread is just to be provocative. And yet, I admit I have enjoyed reading the many responses this thread has generated, but this thread is slanted from the start.

Your title initially implies that leaving Iraq is wrong and leaving Iraq as of now would be a greater wrong. Entering Iraq in the 1st place was wrong and to continue to stay is prolonging the wrong. I think the American public is starting to become conscious of this fact and that is why this war is becoming so unpopular.

Is Cheney employed by them? Haliburton did profit. Can you point to any other US company that does what they do? I sell to the US gov't as well on a yearly contract. One item in particular is patented and is therefore unavailable elsewhere. Therefore, I win this every year under a "No-Bid contract". Can you tell me what is wrong with that? You speak of things for which you do not understand. Just because you are ignorant of the facts, does not make it wrong, it just makes you ignorant............

As far as all the no contract bids that are taking place in Iraq this is just plain war profiteering. And, I can understand your pro-war / continuing war position if you have a no contract bid and I am sure it is a quite profitable arrangement. However, it does not make it right. This war is definitely shifting wealth into the private sector which is a top down system and IMHO is the main reason for this war.

What is obvious from many of your posts in this thread is that many of you simply do not know, what you just do not know. The world is more complex than what you might read on the dailykos. Ignorance may be bliss, but it sure as hell doesn't give you the full perspective needed to make the irrational comments that many seem inclined to give in here. You have two choices: Either put the time into learning for yourself so that you can make informed comments, or just keep letting the blogger trolls form your opinions for you.

And for my last comment about this thread…You are defiantly WRONG about people not knowing. There are many good comments here and these comments are based on rational decision making. However, there has been some serious media/ political spin and lies on this issue, but I think time will tell the truth and as I stated before that the wrong of this war is starting to avail it self to the people, hence the disapproval ratings. There are many smart people here and if you critically think about this political event just slightly you can see the holes and then realize the cost this political charade has and is going to have on humanity as a whole.
IMHO the price of humanity is greater than profit!