tme,
Excellent work!!!
For your efforts, your party will lose seats in the Senate and the House. Your candidate will lose in his bid for the White House.
Keep pointing out the difficulties in Iraq. It will get you exactly nothing.
How does four more years of W. sound?
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Keep pointing out the difficulties in Iraq. It will get you exactly nothing.
[/quote]
Good point, Jeffy. We should all just ignore the truth and pretend everything is rosy. Iraqis are still throwing flowers and dancing in the streets, right?
If everyone believes then it will all be ok, right?
I think what the typical liberal on this forum fails to realize is that real change takes time. Natrually there are bad things happening in Iraq, and they should not be ignored. However, there are good things happening as well.
For Iraq to go from a virtual dictatorship to a democracy will not occur overnight. It takes leaders like President Bush, who have foresight and courage in order to make the seemingly impossible happen.
By the way Jeff, I think you are indeed correct! The democrats will lose seats in both houses of Congress and the Presidency.
Pentagon rule worries some
Sat Sep 25, 9:40 AM ET
Add Top Stories - Chicago Tribune to My Yahoo!
By Vincent J. Schodolski Tribune national correspondent
Luis Prosper has spent more than half his life in the Army and was looking forward to the prospect of a new life starting at middle age.
But that all changed when the Defense Department issued a “stop-loss” order forcing some members of the country’s volunteer armed forces to remain in service beyond their contractually agreed-upon term.
Like thousands of other men and women in the military, Prosper, 41, has had to rethink his future, at least for the time being.
“I was ready to retire, but I’m a soldier,” said Prosper, a 25-year veteran who has reached the rank of sergeant major. “Before we give these soldiers bad leadership, I’d rather stay in uniform and do the job.”
The ongoing operations in Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) are severely stretching the armed forces, a situation that some experts suggest may grow far worse within the next two years.
“In a year and a half or two years, there are going to be huge [personnel] shortages,” said Andrew Exum, a retired Army captain who served in Afghanistan.
Exum and others worry that the stop-loss orders could dissuade service members from re-enlisting and reduce new enlistments.
“The biggest effect will be on those who might have re-enlisted,” Exum said. “The senior non-coms and majors and colonels are not going anywhere, but they are not the ones fighting this war,” he said of the enlisted volunteers who make up the bulk of the fighting force.
The Pentagon (news - web sites) issued its latest stop-loss order in June, forcing thousands of men and women to stay in the military and requiring many to return to combat duty well beyond their agreed-upon active service. The effect of the order has been that thousands of members of the all-volunteer armed forces no longer are serving voluntarily.
Suit challenges stop-loss
Both Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona have condemned the administration’s policy as a kind of backdoor draft.
Last month, a member of the California National Guard filed suit in federal court in San Francisco challenging the stop-loss policy on grounds that such orders can be issued only during a war declared by Congress.
“We challenged the authority the government is doing this on,” said Joshua Sondheimer, one of the attorneys representing the guardsman, identified only as John Doe in the suit.
Sondheimer said his client, a former Marine who served in the current Iraq conflict, has had to postpone college.
“His life is a bit in limbo right now,” he said.
In the all-volunteer armed forces, service is on a contractual basis. Active-duty periods are specified, as are periods of reserve status. Exum, for example, served actively for four years but is contractually bound to another four years in the reserves.
Military service has been voluntary since 1973, when the draft came to an end. And then, tours in theaters of operations were limited to one year for the most part.
“The stop-loss is having a tremendous impact on morale,” said Charles Moskos, a sociology professor at Northwestern University who specializes in the military.
Changed demographics
Moskos, who recently met with U.S. troops in Baghdad, said the demographics of the U.S. armed forces have changed dramatically since service became voluntary.
“The [National] Guard and the reserves are involved this time,” he said. “It is a much more married force with families involved.”
[b]Before the invasion of Iraq, then-Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki said in congressional hearings that several hundred thousand troops would be required to maintain stability in the country.
Shinseki’s suggestion quickly was dismissed by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, a view later echoed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.[/b]
Currently there are more than 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. The latest stop-loss order was bolstered by a separate decision to recall 5,600 members of the 111,000-strong Individual Ready Reserve. Its soldiers, like Exum, have completed their specified period of active duty but remain on reserve status until their contractual commitments are completed.
It was the first large-scale call-up from the Individual Ready Reserve since the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
The underlying problem grows from decisions made in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Foreseeing a changed world in which a smaller force would be adequate, the Army was trimmed by 500,000 active-duty troops, about 300,000 fewer than in 1989.
Then came the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the start of the war on terrorism. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq brought unexpected demands.
Exum, who was not affected by the stop-loss orders, has been in contact with members of his former unit, the 2nd Brigade of the 10th Mountain Division based in Ft. Drum, N.Y.
He says his friends and colleagues are doing their duty and returning to combat, but he remained concerned about the effect on them and their families.
Exum says that if he had been ordered back to service, he would have served. But he still feels that the stop-loss orders, while probably legal, are fundamentally unfair and are done as a less objectionable way to maintain force numbers than returning to a draft.
Shinseki’s a dumbass. Paul and Don know a lot more about this shit than some punk-ass soldier anyway. Right Jeffy?
Thoughts from a general actually involved in Iraq, from the Washington Post:
Battling for Iraq
By David H. Petraeus
Sunday, September 26, 2004; Page B07
BAGHDAD – Helping organize, train and equip nearly a quarter-million of Iraq’s security forces is a daunting task. Doing so in the middle of a tough insurgency increases the challenge enormously, making the mission akin to repairing an aircraft while in flight – and while being shot at. Now, however, 18 months after entering Iraq, I see tangible progress. Iraqi security elements are being rebuilt from the ground up.
The institutions that oversee them are being reestablished from the top down. And Iraqi leaders are stepping forward, leading their country and their security forces courageously in the face of an enemy that has shown a willingness to do anything to disrupt the establishment of the new Iraq.
In recent months, I have observed thousands of Iraqis in training and then watched as they have conducted numerous operations. Although there have been reverses – not to mention horrific terrorist attacks – there has been progress in the effort to enable Iraqis to shoulder more of the load for their own security, something they are keen to do. The future undoubtedly will be full of difficulties, especially in places such as Fallujah. We must expect setbacks and recognize that not every soldier or policeman we help train will be equal to the challenges ahead.
Nonetheless, there are reasons for optimism. Today approximately 164,000 Iraqi police and soldiers (of which about 100,000 are trained and equipped) and an additional 74,000 facility protection forces are performing a wide variety of security missions. Equipment is being delivered. Training is on track and increasing in capacity. Infrastructure is being repaired. Command and control structures and institutions are being reestablished.
Most important, Iraqi security forces are in the fight – so much so that they are suffering substantial casualties as they take on more and more of the burdens to achieve security in their country. Since Jan. 1 more than 700 Iraqi security force members have been killed, and hundreds of Iraqis seeking to volunteer for the police and military have been killed as well.
Six battalions of the Iraqi regular army and the Iraqi Intervention Force are now conducting operations. Two of these battalions, along with the Iraqi commando battalion, the counterterrorist force, two Iraqi National Guard battalions and thousands of policemen recently contributed to successful operations in Najaf. Their readiness to enter and clear the Imam Ali shrine was undoubtedly a key factor in enabling Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani to persuade members of the Mahdi militia to lay down their arms and leave the shrine.
In another highly successful operation several days ago, the Iraqi counterterrorist force conducted early-morning raids in Najaf that resulted in the capture of several senior lieutenants and 40 other members of that militia, and the seizure of enough weapons to fill nearly four 7 1/2-ton dump trucks.
Within the next 60 days, six more regular army and six additional Intervention Force battalions will become operational. Nine more regular army battalions will complete training in January, in time to help with security missions during the Iraqi elections at the end of that month.
Iraqi National Guard battalions have also been active in recent months. Some 40 of the 45 existing battalions – generally all except those in the Fallujah-Ramadi area – are conducting operations on a daily basis, most alongside coalition forces, but many independently. Progress has also been made in police training. In the past week alone, some 1,100 graduated from the basic policing course and five specialty courses. By early spring, nine academies in Iraq and one in Jordan will be graduating a total of 5,000 police each month from the eight-week course, which stresses patrolling and investigative skills, substantive and procedural legal knowledge, and proper use of force and weaponry, as well as pride in the profession and adherence to the police code of conduct.
Iraq’s borders are long, stretching more than 2,200 miles. Reducing the flow of extremists and their resources across the borders is critical to success in the counterinsurgency. As a result, with support from the Department of Homeland Security, specialized training for Iraq’s border enforcement elements began earlier this month in Jordan.
Regional academies in Iraq have begun training as well, and more will come online soon. In the months ahead, the 16,000-strong border force will expand to 24,000 and then 32,000. In addition, these forces will be provided with modern technology, including vehicle X-ray machines, explosive-detection devices and ground sensors.
Outfitting hundreds of thousands of new Iraqi security forces is difficult and complex, and many of the units are not yet fully equipped. But equipment has begun flowing. Since July 1, for example, more than 39,000 weapons and 22 million rounds of ammunition have been delivered to Iraqi forces, in addition to 42,000 sets of body armor, 4,400 vehicles, 16,000 radios and more than 235,000 uniforms.
Considerable progress is also being made in the reconstruction and refurbishing of infrastructure for Iraq’s security forces. Some $1 billion in construction to support this effort has been completed or is underway, and five Iraqi bases are already occupied by entire infantry brigades.
Numbers alone cannot convey the full story. The human dimension of this effort is crucial. The enemies of Iraq recognize how much is at stake as Iraq reestablishes its security forces. Insurgents and foreign fighters continue to mount barbaric attacks against police stations, recruiting centers and military installations, even though the vast majority of the population deplores such attacks. Yet despite the sensational attacks, there is no shortage of qualified recruits volunteering to join Iraqi security forces. In the past couple of months, more than 7,500 Iraqi men have signed up for the army and are preparing to report for basic training to fill out the final nine battalions of the Iraqi regular army. Some 3,500 new police recruits just reported for training in various locations. And two days after the recent bombing on a street outside a police recruiting location in Baghdad, hundreds of Iraqis were once again lined up inside the force protection walls at another location – where they were greeted by interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.
I meet with Iraqi security force leaders every day. Though some have given in to acts of intimidation, many are displaying courage and resilience in the face of repeated threats and attacks on them, their families and their comrades. I have seen their determination and their desire to assume the full burden of security tasks for Iraq.
There will be more tough times, frustration and disappointment along the way. It is likely that insurgent attacks will escalate as Iraq’s elections approach. Iraq’s security forces are, however, developing steadily and they are in the fight. Momentum has gathered in recent months. With strong Iraqi leaders out front and with continued coalition – and now NATO – support, this trend will continue. It will not be easy, but few worthwhile things are.
The writer, an Army lieutenant general, commands the Multinational Security Transition Command in Iraq. He previously commanded the 101st Airborne Division, which was deployed in Iraq from March 2003 until February 2004.
Powell: Situation in Iraq ‘Getting Worse’
By LAURA MECKLER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Colin Powell sees the situation in Iraq “getting worse” as planned elections approach, and the top U.S. military commander for Iraq says he expects more violence ahead.
Their comments Sunday followed a week in which President Bush (news - web sites) and Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi spoke optimistically about the situation despite the beheadings of two more Americans and the deaths of dozens of people in car bombings.
In its latest report, the military said four Marines died in separate incidents Friday, adding to a toll that has topped 1,000 since the U.S.-led invasion.
Powell said the insurgency is only becoming more violent as planned January elections near.
“It’s getting worse,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.” “They are determined to disrupt the election. They do not want the Iraqi people to vote for their own leaders in a free, democratic election.”
Army Gen. John Abizaid, commander of U.S. troops in the Middle East, warned that voting may not be possible in parts of Iraq where the violence is too intense.
“I don’t think we’ll ever achieve perfection and when we look for perfection in a combat zone we’re going to be sadly disappointed,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
Abizaid compared the situation in Iraq to the disputed U.S. presidential election in 2000 that put George W. Bush in the White House following a protracted Florida ballot fight that ended up in the Supreme Court.
“I don’t think Iraq will have a perfect election. And if I recall, looking back at our own election four years ago, it wasn’t perfect either,” he said.
The goal in Iraq is to have successful voting in the “vast majority of the country,” said Abizaid, who leads the U.S. Central Command.
“We’re going to have to fight our way all the way through elections,” he said, “and there’ll be a lot of violence between now and then.”
Abizaid spoke of a major offensive before the election, with U.S. and Iraqi forces doing “whatever’s necessary to bring areas in Iraq under Iraqi control.”
Powell offered a road map to the coming offensive. He said the military likely will tackle the Sunni Triangle cities of Ramadi and Samarra before attempting to restore order in nearby Fallujah, which he called “the tough one.”
“We don’t like the situation in Fallujah,” Powell said on CNN’s “Late Edition.”
“The other ones, I think, are more manageable,” he added. “Ramadi and Samarra, I think we’ll get those back under control, and then we’ll have to deal with Fallujah.”
Powell said planning is under way for an Iraqi conference, possibly next month in Jordan or Egypt, of the world’s leading industrialized nations and regional powers, including Iran and Syria.
“This was a way to reach out to Iraq’s immediate neighbors and persuade them that this is the time to help Iraq, so that the region can become stable,” he said.
Including the Group of Eight economic powers, Powell said, “adds a little bit more oomph to the conference” and brings in nations that could contribute “more in the way of resources.”
U.S. officials have expressed conflicting opinions about whether security will enable all Iraqis to vote in January.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told Congress on Friday that the elections must be held throughout the country, including areas gripped by violence. But Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said that if insurgents prevent Iraqis from voting in some areas, a partial vote would be better than none at all.
Asked about Rumsfeld’s comments, Powell repeated the State Department’s assertion that all Iraqis must have the chance to vote if the election is to be credible.
“You know, there will be polling stations that are shot at,” he said. “There will be insurgents who will still be out there who will try to keep people from voting.”
“But I think what we have to keep shooting for and what is achievable is to give everybody the opportunity to vote in the upcoming election, to make the election fully credible, and something that will stand the test of the international community’s examination.”
I see nothing wrong with firing on a crowd of people looting your equipment and weapons in a combat zone. The special forces teach that the #1 way to aquire arms and ammunition for an insurgency is battlefield recovery. If they really didn’t want to get involved, they should have stayed away. Someone on top of my car = attempted possession and use of force to defend my property. Someone on my APC = possession = deadly force in a combat zone. Being a reporter covering the crowds climbing all over an APC and not wearing a helmet = death from stupidity. Sorry, I don’t have much compassion for chanting anti-american muslims.
Maybe I have a different perspective because I am over here, but could anyone tell me when an army has invaded a large country with millions of people (who were the previous sworn enemies of the invaders), defeated a large army, and waged a counter-insurgency for almost 2 years while only suffering 1000 dead and 6000 wounded. It is hard for people to have perspective when all they are forced to observe is a bunch of sensationalized headlines and video. We lost 3000 civilians in only an hour or so. I don’t mean to undervalue the sacrifice of our fallen and wounded (obviously I have friends in their ranks), but from a historical military perspective, I believe it has been a success. The only thing holding us back now is our will to fight and suffer casualties. We are being bled out slowly while the military mostly hides in well-protected bases instead of occupying cities and destroying the insurgent forces. There are some exceptions. We can thank the media and Bush hating democrates for wanting defeat and causing a lack of commitment (much needed to fight a war) and at the same time, we can thank the Republicans and senior leadership for caving into the pressure. Just my thoughts. Stay safe.
Amen Trevor. Definitely stay safe.
Trevorthrasher-
You ask when have we invaded a country and defeated a large army whilst fighting an insurgency with ONLY 1000 casualties.
Vietnam was a close parallel to this. We continually whipped the NVA in every major battle. We decimated the Vietcong after Tet in 68. Yet, we pulled out in 73 after 58,000 american KIA.
Just Like Vietnam we have the military superiority. Just like Vietnam we have an enemy that is committed to their goal regardless of their KIA.
To fight this battle to the bitter end we we need to be willing to accept casualties that will continue to grow! Remember Vietnam in the early years 63 through 65 had fewer then 100 KIA’s per year those numbers grew to sickening proportions.
Again, its easy for armchair generals like BB and others to ra, ra, ra, ra, when their ass aint on the line! They remind of Bush ducking the real action while others die on a day to day basis… This aint no chess game those are real men and women dying over there! If they are willing to help out with the hard work their argument would be more credible.
Hell BB wouldn’t even have to go to the front lines they need JAG lawyers over there!
On Bush “ducking”:
http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerry200409270906.asp
CLIP AND SAVE THIS ITEM FOR WHEN KERRY MENTIONS VIETNAM [ 09/27 09:06 AM http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerry200409270906.asp
A point in a Newsweek MSN
article, noticed by Instapundit
Instapundit :
The standard rap against Bush is that he was ducking combat by joining the Guard. Actually, the Texas Air Guard had a program called Palace Alert that allowed pilots to volunteer for flight time in Vietnam. Three of Bush’s fellow pilots-Udell, Woodfin and Fred Bradley-recalled to NEWSWEEK that Bush inquired with the base commander about signing up for Palace Alert. He was told no; he had too few flying hours at the time and his plane, the F-102, was by then deemed obsolete for air combat.
Compare that with this Daily Telegraph News: Breaking stories & updates - The Telegraph
article about Kerry writing “to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s.”
The contrast between the two men is not quite as clear as the Democratic strategists who planned their convention might hope, is it?
BTW, Elk,
If this were a full mobilization conflict like WWII I’d sign up to see what I could do - although my particular skill set as a corporate attorney is very incompatible with military law, I’m sure they wouldn’t mind providing some litigation training. If it were even a drafting conflict such as Viet Nam was, I’d consider signing up like my dad did – he did ROTC at Stanford even though his draft number was such that he had mathematically neglible odds of being called, and then served on an ammo ship in the Gulf of Tonkin as a lieutenant before coming back and starting his career as a pharmaceutical chemist in biotech.
Anyway, thanks for your service, and for protecting the First Amendment, which entitles you to your interesting opinions.
By the way, BB I am truly impressed with your education level and that of your dad as well, as with the fact that you’re a successful corporate lawyer. What I am saying is that you are being provided with the ultimate occasion to prove to yourself as well as to others your mettle! You, a corporate lawyer can walk away from wealth and comfort few of us know! You can do the most honorable thing possible, you can test your fabric as a man, a T-man and join ranks with your fellow americans in the battle for freedom!
Not an an internet forum, but up close and personal! You can comeback, if your lucky and resume your corporate law and wealth, but if you don’t you will at least have made the ultimate sacrifice for your family, your country, your self, your freedom! You are smart, you are healthy, you have the opportunity to show honor and character on a level few are afforded! I hope you do the honorable thing!
You folks have to be smart enough to know that the stories you post are all pushing the agenda of the writer. I wonder what type of story an active general is likely to write. Hmm, I wonder.
Of course there are good things to mention in Iraq. Of course the media doesn’t do a story every time someone completes a mission without a scratch. Of course it happens a lot.
However, it is extremely dangerous for the administration and the populace to stick its collective head in the sand and ignore the realities of the situation. If unrest is growing and larger numbers of the general populace are becoming disgruntled, then we may end up with a big issue.
This isn’t going to go away no matter how many times Uncle George clicks his heels together. Extremely poor judgement has been used by the administration with respect to post (traditional) combat operations. This does not lead me to be confident that the administration has the wisdom to deal with the situation effectively.
This isn’t a pacifistic ultra-liberal type of comment. It is one that says be careful you are in the midst of fucking up. Not a bad message to get through to the administration so it can sharpen up a bit.
Getting the administration to focus appropriate energies on solving these problems is entirely a suitable thing for the populace to be doing. Maybe you folks in Bushworld should stop circling the wagons every time comments arise. Bush isn’t perfect, and when he fucks up, he needs to know about it. Everyone does.
It’s as easy to argue that being a blind parrot cheerleading the administration is just as damaging or even more so than thinking critically and voicing an opinion. With millions of eyes, ears and voices maybe the administration can learn and adjust their tactics.
For example, I want success in Iraq. I want the place to become a model democracy. I want the end of conflict in the middle east. However, history would indicate that growing an ever larger disaffected populace is not the way to get there. While military force is certainly needed now, other strategies will also be required.
The inability of the current administration to additionally see more sophisticated issues than just deadly force and combat makes it difficult to see a long term positive conclusion to current events.
So, while you may be enjoying the rah-rah cheerleading of all the exciting action, the end goal should be to find a way to wind down the military action with an appropriate peace in place. That is always supposed to be ultimate goal.
If the populace of Iraq is starting to become more actively upset at the American forces, are we moving in that direction? The adminstration is at the top of this… and if things do not work, they are simply responsible. Whining and crying about pacifists, patriotism and other non-sequiturs won’t change that.
So, continue to crow and feel good about the US in action. I’m glad it makes you feel strong, safe and proud. However, at some point, consider growing up and starting to look for an appropriate way to get out of having to be engaged in military action.
Excellent post, vroom. Thank you.
I guess I have a few more quick comments in response:
I am not exactly sure that we “invaded” Vietnam. We didn’t lose only a few hundred Americans while we had over 100,000 in country (like we do now) and we lost an average of 5000-6000 a year. Also we didn’t remove anyone from power. I don’t see the comparison of success/failure other than lack of conviction from a large segment of the country.
We need good lawyers over here! Someone needs to protect the SEALS who are being charged with hitting an Iraqi in the head with a weapon when he became resistant and the soldiers who took a mans SUV during the early war so they could accomplish their mission. I guess they should have used verbal judo.
Would all of these Bush haters (especially the ones who tell me to “grow up” and accept their opinions)please tell me what we should do now other than bash Bush and say that the sky is falling and we are all doomed. Doesn’t do much for my morale.
I haven’t ever heard this point brought up, but I would much rather serve with someone who doesn’t want to be here than with someone who wants to serve only to further his political agenda and is who is obviously trying to get purple hearts and other medals. I wouldn’t feel safe at all under his watch.
Do you know they have Pizza Hut in Basra and they deliver! Now that is democracy and freedom in action. I’ll get their phone # if you need it.
Peace.
Trevor, I’m not claiming to have all the answers. I also don’t have thousands of brilliant people working for me to help me make policy decisions.
However, one thing we could do, which would be effective in various ways, is find a way to get rebuilding money put into the process of rebuilding.
The effects of this would be felt on various fronts. If people are busy working and earning money with a useful job helping their fellow citizens, they aren’t busy getting bored, angry and fighting an attempt to create law and order.
Of course, nobody wants to work for an American company – it’s a recipe for kidnapping. How about turn to some wholly Arabic companies in neighboring countries. Pay them to help build roads, schools, water treament plants and whatever else might be needed.
This goes against the grain of putting the almighty dollar behind only the countries that participated militarily, but this isn’t about money. It shouldn’t be. Let’s get the goddamn rebuilding moving pronto and get some improvement in the face of the populace. How the hell else do you plan to make them happy? It’s not like we control the media over there.
Remember, the general populace has nothing to do with terrorists and at one point was probably fairly happy at the concept of a regime change. This doesn’t mean they want Americans occupying their land, just that they wanted positive change. Shit, this is the land of Hollywood and Disney World. Are you telling me we can’t find a way to make most of them happy?
However, channeling the money through Arabic partner companies wouldn’t grease the pockets of the right people. It wouldn’t be politically appropriate and y’know, its possible some of the pork might even get diverted in the wrong direction. Then the shit would hit the fan, wouldn’t it?
However, if Bush really is a man who wants to get the right thing done, then he needs to get off his ass and look after the well-being of those innocent citizens he so recently liberated. Surely there are a lot of innocent citizens in there, or we wouldn’t be using that as justification for invasion these days.
When they, the deserving citizens, are fat and happy they won’t be launching grenades at US troops. I think we can all agree it will be good when the troops don’t need to be in harms way.
The Bush administration does not know how to make people happy. It isn’t even interested in trying. It is too busy playing “with us or against us” to find ways to be constructive. If you can’t see it, and also that positive steps are easy to find if you look for them, then you’ll just have to accept criticism from time to time.
So, with thousands of overpaid people in the Bush administration, you are going to tell me there are simply no solutions available? No, the reality is the Bush administration is too busy pushing it’s own agenda to really seek solutions.
However, I must say seperate your notion of self-worth and esteem from that of the current administration. The Bush administration is not America. You are not the Bush administration. America is you!
Whoever your president is, it’s just a man entrusted and empowered to make decisions for a short while. Stop treating them like gods and maybe they’ll start acting like men.
Hmm, just had another interesting idea…
Take some of the rebuilding money and use it to buy raw supplies to build a mosque in each town, city or community. I mean, you are basically buying stone, wood and concrete mix, its not that expensive.
Now, pay the locals in every city to spend the next year or two building the thing by hand. Make sure each one gets a stone in it saying built by hand to help solidify the friendship between US and Iraqi citizens or some such. Place it away from the symbolic important section of the structure.
So, for the next several years these people are building these things. Every day they go home fed, paid and tired. You know what they aren’t doing? They aren’t fighting Americans. Hell, I imagine if this was a work in progress people worldwide would donate to it to keep it going if it was expensive.
Can you imagine anything more divisive than terrorists blowing up Mosques? That would set the Islamic community on its ear, and finally get us on the same side about something.
Something like this could have been done right at the very top. Go to the top-most Islamic priests and work with them to get this project underway. Use it to build relationships with those that have the power to outlaw terrorists acts by issuing their fatwa’s. Hell, these people could have found a way to let us infidels share the work of building them. Talk about building relationships between the troops and the community leaders.
No, again, Bush isn’t very good at working with people. He’s very good at dividing them up and attacking them. Silly idiot that he is.
Sigh, now that would have been some useful damned political posturing! Talk about a way to get into the power cycle that is causing us so much trouble these days. What are we getting instead? Obviously, an agenda that leaves finding peace as an afterthought.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Thoughts from a general actually involved in Iraq, from the Washington Post.
You folks have to be smart enough to know that the stories you post are all pushing the agenda of the writer. I wonder what type of story an active general is likely to write. Hmm, I wonder.
Of course there are good things to mention in Iraq. Of course the media doesn’t do a story every time someone completes a mission without a scratch. Of course it happens a lot.
However, it is extremely dangerous for the administration and the populace to stick its collective head in the sand and ignore the realities of the situation. If unrest is growing and larger numbers of the general populace are becoming disgruntled, then we may end up with a big issue.
This isn’t going to go away no matter how many times Uncle George clicks his heels together. Extremely poor judgement has been used by the administration with respect to post (traditional) combat operations. This does not lead me to be confident that the administration has the wisdom to deal with the situation effectively.
This isn’t a pacifistic ultra-liberal type of comment. It is one that says be careful you are in the midst of fucking up. Not a bad message to get through to the administration so it can sharpen up a bit.
Getting the administration to focus appropriate energies on solving these problems is entirely a suitable thing for the populace to be doing. Maybe you folks in Bushworld should stop circling the wagons every time comments arise. Bush isn’t perfect, and when he fucks up, he needs to know about it. Everyone does.
It’s as easy to argue that being a blind parrot cheerleading the administration is just as damaging or even more so than thinking critically and voicing an opinion. With millions of eyes, ears and voices maybe the administration can learn and adjust their tactics.
For example, I want success in Iraq. I want the place to become a model democracy. I want the end of conflict in the middle east. However, history would indicate that growing an ever larger disaffected populace is not the way to get there. While military force is certainly needed now, other strategies will also be required.
The inability of the current administration to additionally see more sophisticated issues than just deadly force and combat makes it difficult to see a long term positive conclusion to current events.
So, while you may be enjoying the rah-rah cheerleading of all the exciting action, the end goal should be to find a way to wind down the military action with an appropriate peace in place. That is always supposed to be ultimate goal.
If the populace of Iraq is starting to become more actively upset at the American forces, are we moving in that direction? The adminstration is at the top of this… and if things do not work, they are simply responsible. Whining and crying about pacifists, patriotism and other non-sequiturs won’t change that.
So, continue to crow and feel good about the US in action. I’m glad it makes you feel strong, safe and proud. However, at some point, consider growing up and starting to look for an appropriate way to get out of having to be engaged in military action.[/quote]
I can never tell at whom you’re directing your tirades – however, if to me, you obviously haven’t been reading this thread. I’ll refer you to my posts above for a realistic assessment of the situation as it stands now.
Also, thanks for pointing out the obvious – I don’t think anyone ever would have assumed an author had a viewpoint otherwise… Of course, it cuts both ways. Both types of articles are illustrative of facts going on, and both should be incorporated into a view of the situation.
As for your ideas on getting people to work, they aren’t bad. However, they do need security - and the decision seems to have been made to wait until the Iraqi army/police are sufficiently prepared to hold the cities where the trouble is centered before sending U.S. troops in to take them. One can agree or disagree with this position, which seems designed to accomplish a strategic victory and then minimize U.S. casualties, while at the same time giving legitimacy to the Iraqi forces and government. And, with the expected increase of insurgency related to the election, more resources than ever need to be devoted to security. Nothing will undercut the insurgents more than a legitimate Iraqi regime.
BTW, as an aside, I have no doubt the ACLU would sue under “separation of church and state” if the Bush administration used government funds to build churches, even if they aren’t churches here…
A blogger on the ground in Iraq – interesting stuff:
http://www.mudvillegazette.com
Also, a collection of posts from Iraqi bloggers can be found here – also quite interesting:
BB, you are a snarky son of a bitch at times aren’t you? It is very damned clear by the idolatry and cheerleading that many people simply believe what they read when it sounds good.
Clearly, these folks, perhaps not yourself, need to be reminded from time to time to think about what they are reading and to consider what it might really mean.
You are going to have to stop assuming everything written is meant personally for your consumption. I have no doubt you can read and think if you choose to.
This is however an open forum, and my comments are addressed to points that are raised in the discussion by various parties at various times.
Also, to address an issue you raised, I wouldn’t characterize it as a decision to get security in place first, I would characterize it as a myopic vision entailing military means only… that resulted in lost opportunities to improve relations and hence security.
This points to the fact that Bush isn’t being driven by a concern for the Iraqi people though he will use that as a justification. Funny, what he says and what he does don’t match.
Anyway, I’m not claiming to have “the answer”… I’m simply showing how easy it should be for the almighty Bush to come up with ideas, especially since I can belt out two over as many hours.
If you are the type to “get shit done” then solutions can be found for whatever problems might represent themselves. If you aren’t of that type, then you can find excuses or reasons for not getting something done.
Finally, these things aren’t tirades. They are basically mini opinion articles written by me, instead of some wag working at a conventional publication. At least I am wiling and able to present my own ideas as opposed to mindlessly parroting other peoples ideas. Heck, I wouldn’t mind being a paid wag writing opinion pieces.
The right is often challenging those complaining about the administration to come up with ideas, thinking that there must be no good ideas if the administration didn’t think of them. Well, there are ideas. If your mind can hold onto concepts other than hatred and military might it isn’t hard to think of them at all.
Why isn’t the administration thinking of these things? The answer to this question, whatever it might be, should be extremely illustrative.