Now if we can only get more like him to stand up and push this forward.....

Hallelujah!! Bless this Representative, Bless him!! An immediate withdrawal from Iraq --- there is no other solution, no other way to approach this. If Iraq needs further assistance, let the newly elected government make such a request of the international community. That's the only way to proceed here. BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW!

Good catch David.

I watched some of the news conf on CNN and they seemed to be afraid to show all of it ... just portions.

I looked elsewhere and he said some strong things. Raw Story had some of it.

Terrific idea. Let's tell the terrorists how long they have to build stockpiles of weapons and strategically place their forces. Once we're gone, radical terrorists will massacre our allies, free Saddam, and we're back where we started. I'm getting really tired of cowardly politicians torpedoing America's efforts to keep our own citizens safe from the terrorists. Al Zarqawi is not in New York; he is fighting our military in Iraq. Would you rather the fight against radical Islam and terrorism be in our own backyard? I respectfully disagree.

Obviously "staying the course" is not working. Total withdraw of US troops and reorganization under the international community would give Iraq a chance to heal itself and take the American face off from the occupation. If the US does not choose to withdraw troops, then the President needs to come up with a plan to complete the mission. The current course is unacceptable.

I read on one of the blogs last night that someone was going to make a major statement on Iraq this AM. Turned on the tv and saw an airplane trying to land with one of it's wheels not down....every channel glued to this 'world changing event'. Evidently, missed the press conference by Wurth. I got online to try to get info and evidently CNN was going with the conference then ended it before Wurth finished. Faux didn't cover it. I was able to locate a transcript somewhere, out there, but came here to see if Brad was talking about it. Thanks D.E. for getting this up right away.

I have been one of the biggest critics of the 'if I knew then, what I know now' members of Congress. Have always believed they knew then, what some of us here, knew then. The PNAC agenda was on the net for god's sake. The agenda regarding Iraq began with Poppy. I don't even need to go there as it has been much discussed here.

I guess what impresses me about Wurth is his background. He is not saying 'if I knew then'. He is flat out saying, get out. He has seen first hand what is going on and has been to the Vet hospitals and talked to the wounded. He is not apologizing for his prowar stance.

He most certainly had a long talk with his conscience before making that statement, knew how unpopular this would make him, in the hollowed halls of congress. A known Hawk, once very powerful. I believe this is a major story and perhaps too new to get the coverage I think is warranted. I will be watching this story. M4

(OT... Everyone watching the 'Patriot Act' story. Last nail in our coffin)

I need to correct my previous post. not Wurth..duh, Murtha. While I was writing several comments were being posted, I thought I was the second, came in as 6. Need to read the others but wanted to correct the name. M4

I watched the McLaughlin report a day or so ago. The issue was whether or not the US presence in Iraq had destabilized the region.

All the neoCons (4 of 5) agreed that in fact it had been stabilized, as did the progressive on the panel.

What was startling was that the neoCons went on to say the destabilization showed we were succeeding there because that is what we went in to do ... to destabilize the mid-east.

Oh really? So we can declare victory and exit now that we have destabilized the region? What madness.

KMS #4 So you want to continue to occupy a democratic country? Is it good for democracies to occupy other democracies militarily? Does that look good?

What was all the hoopola about the giant percentages of folk voting? They vote, have a constitution, and they have the problems that democracies have.

So lets let them do their thing! Let freedom ring Kevin. What are you afraid of? Letting Iraq be all it can be free?

typo in my #8

I said "All the neoCons (4 of 5) agreed that in fact it had been stabilized" but I should have said "All the neoCons (4 of 5) agreed that in fact it had been de-stabilized".

There, see W, it doesn't hurt to admit a mistake. It hurts worse not to admit it.

Hey Kevin-

Newsflash for ya'- we ARE fighting "them" here.

Why do you think we have a color-coded chart to let us know what the daily "threat level" is?

Sorry, Kevin, but the three biggest terrorists on the face of the planet work in our White House or nearby, with the support of longtime terrorists known as Christian Crusaders. Those of you who worry about radical Islamic fundamentalists really should be more concerned with radical neoconservative fundamentalist Christians hell-bent on bringing about the destruction of this planet so that they may rise up in all their glory! Yes, we need to fight for peace, but not with guns and bombs, and mini-nukes. We fight for peace by standing up against bullies like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice, and their ilk who put people like Saddam Hussein in power.

#11 I'm deeply offended by your comment. You give us Jews(ok, so I'm not terribly observant) no credit for RULING THE WORLD. Don't you know that the neo-cons are merely our puppets. No blood for fertsalach!!!

Kevin Mark Smith,

I disrepectfully disagree with you, Kevin. Forgive me, I usually show respect for everyone, but you have been holding onto this PARTISAN war position for too long now. You will argue devil's advocate to death, regardless of how senseless or morally perverted. Do you think fighting our wars in other peoples back yards is a good way to curb terrorism? How 'bout I come over to your place when I need to take a dump and squeeze out a loaf on your dinning room table. Is that going to make me real popular over at the Smith residence?

Ya know. I know that some times I am taken in the wrong way. I just want the good people who post here to know that I am very passionate about the things I care about. My family. their safety and welfare. I care about the health and welfare of our country. Our rights and freedom. I'm a war time vet. Our loyalties may have been abused but our hearts were in the right place while we served our country.
I seem at time harse, I am not. I am a very caring person and I do appreciate you all here very much. We are all on the same side with a different opinion at times. You are a bright bunch and I learn from you all every day. We must endeavor to keep truth alive.

#4
Kevin,
Respectfully, I must disagree with you. You wrote
"...Let's tell the terrorists how long they have to build stockpiles of weapons..."
I get your point, and were it not for the fact that in our haste to advance into Iraq we left caches of weapons unsecured and unguarded for anyone to find, I might even agree with you on it.
You wrote
"...Once we're gone, radical terrorists will massacre our allies..."
Our forces are being massacred now, every day. For various reasons (leaving the borders unguarded, fueling anti-Americanism with our arrogance, incompetence and brutality) the numbers of those against us have swelled. Do you not agree that, before we invaded, Iraq was not the recruiting ground for terrorism that it now is?
You wrote
"...I'm getting really tired of cowardly politicians torpedoing America's efforts to keep our own citizens safe from the terrorists..."
I think it's rather unfair to characterize every politician who opposes the war as "cowardly". Murther, for example, is a veteran. Surely you would admit that good people can hold opposing views.

As for America's efforts to keep its citizens safe, it seems to me that our present administration's record on that is inexcusably bad: our ports, our chemical plants, our reactors are still, judging from numerous reports, insecure and at risk, and they've badly neglected first-responders, too.
But by far the worst example of its neglect is in not having properly armed our soldiers. That was & is unconscionable & indefensible, to my mind.
You wrote
"Would you rather the fight against radical Islam and terrorism be in our own backyard? "
I fear that. But it seems to me that we are now in MORE danger of it happening, not less. The billions that we are pouring into Iraq would have been better spent in securing our own country and in going after those who actually attacked us.
I respect your right to your opinion, but I'm mystified as to how & why you have come to it.

Total blackout on MSM, oh well, informed people have turned off the Merry Sunshine Media and turned on the computers....thank god for Cindy Sheehan, the woman that brought be to the blogs in August. Better late than never. M4 (who believes the trolls are bush's base just doing their daily assigned tasks to disrupt sites that do not adhere to the company Lie)

A correction to my comment #5. First the president needs to define the mission, then come up with a plan to complete it.

Re: Kevin Smith, #4

To actually try to follow this argument of the alleged 'just-lying-in-wait' terrorists to its logical conclusion:

Okay, so Al Qaeda is running wild in IRAQ, according to this faith-based reasoning. And if the U.S. says "we're leaving" they'll "bide their time" until we leave [GREAT!! Fewer U.S. casualties] and then ATTACK full-bore...someone...AFTER we're gone. But WHO?? Other Arab Iraqis, trying to pick up the pieces of their own country?? What kind of massive public BACKLASH AGAINST Al Qaeda, by their own people, do you think that would generate??? Sounds like an anti-Al Qaeda Public Relations HOMERUN to me. Where else in the WORLD, where Al Qaeda cells are actually operating, have they targeted their own potential base of support, in such a way??? And if we aren't talking about Al Qaeda, which would be at least a semi-reality-based view of the situation, we are simply saying we must set our military up as a permanent police force to separate the quarreling factions of Iraqi society, because somehow we don't expect Iraqis, after TWO AND A HALF YEARS and HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, to be able to do a better job than the occupying Americans, in securing and redefining their own country. Some "mission." Talk about hubris. Since polls say Iraqis want the U.S. out, who are WE to say we're staying 'cause "you" need us...?!

Rep. & USMC Colonel John Murtha: LEAD THE WAY OUT. The MILITARY mission, such as it was, came to a conclusion a long time ago. Hussein is in prison, and out of power even if he weren't, we have FINALLY decided Iraq has NO WMD, EXACTLY as they proclaimed to the U.N. before the invasion, and meanwhile we're using WMD of our own on the homes and families of potential future Al Qaeda recruits. Time to cut our losses, while we still can. The Vietnam Vet has this one right.

Way to go finally someone whos willing to takes some heat for the truth we all already know.. but no one will say

If the neoCONs want to save face --

Dumbya's (dictatorship) Democracy has been instilled in Iraq.

The majority of the Iraqis want the US to leave NOW.

In a Democracy, that's how it works.

Support democracy - leave now.

Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear - not absence of fear. ~~~Mark Twain~~~

Oops --- #20 --- INSTALLED not instilled.

The SIMPLE fact is, the people pushing this war know FULL WELL that "iraqi people don't want us there", and know FULL WELL that if WE don't "guide their elections", we end up with people in power "we don't like"..

We're not there for Democracy, we're not there for liberation of a people from a dictator.. we're there for OIL.. and we -have- to make sure the "right" people are put in charge, or we lose that oil.

All this bullshit about "terrorists" is just that, bullshit. It's OUR FAULT they are there.. they were NOT there when Saddam was there.. and for that moron KMS to imply "the terrorists would free Saddam" is to play on the SAME DISPROVED IGNORANT POSITION that Saddam had -anything- to do with terrorists. People, it's telling that KMS is SOO bent on keeping that lie/tie alive. It's the only way to keep swaying public opinion with FEAR.

I so tire of idiots and assholes lying for personal gain (being it financial or religious or just plain old arrogance)

Hear hear, Savanster.

But, if the neoCONs want to save face, they have to work with one of their lies - the democracy lie. But they will have to suck it up if they want to save face.

From the AP
Seldom overtly political, Murtha uncharacteristically responded to Vice President Dick Cheney's comments this week that Democrats were spouting "one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges" about the Bush administration's use of intelligence before the war.

"I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done," Murtha said.

Referring to Bush, Murtha added, "I resent the fact, on Veterans Day, he criticized Democrats for criticizing them."

Murtha once worked closely with the vice president when Cheney was defense secretary. During Vietnam, Bush served stateside in the National Guard while Cheney's five deferments kept him out of the service entirely.

With a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, Murtha retired from the Marine Corps reserves as a colonel in 1990 after 37 years as a Marine, only a few years longer than he's been in Congress. Elected in 1974, Murtha has become known as an authority on national security whose advice was sought out by Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

I like this guy!

I was very upset by your call to immediatly withdraw from Iraq. I am a viet nam vet. 1968 a machinegunner with 11th L.I.B Americal Div. wounded sept.68. I am now an elected official and also an ex-democrat now independent. I as most of my viet nam buddies suport our troops 100%. We never knew what we were fighting for if it was for rice patties, jungles,mountians or poor people in mud huts. did the democrats justify the forgotten war and can you remember how many (boys) not men we lost. One casualty is to many but i feel the men in Iraq are fighting for a cause. What will happen when we are not willing to fight for freedom.

Defenders of the war i nIraq have never allowed themselves to understand that when someone invades someone else's country, the people who live in the invaded country get plenty pissed off. And if the invaders try to pretend that they're acting as "liberators," the people who live there are even more insulted.

The only way to explain it is to ask, "What would you trolls say if a foreign nation invaded us, simply to 'liberate' us from George W. Bush?" As bad as Bush is, we'd respond, "Get the hell out of here. We'll deal with Bush ourselves." Right? Is it really any more complicated than that?

Doyle.. Look, if you really are a vet, then you should be pissed as HELL that we're in Iraq.. we're not there fighting for "freedom", if you can't see that, then I don't know what to tell ya...

You didn't fight for "democracy" in Vietnam, which is what makes that conflict so heinous and pisses so many of us off. You were there risking your life for LIES.. not for freedom, and not to protect this country. Your DUTY as a SOLDIER is to PROTECT AMERICA, not wage holy wars for psychos who stole elections.. Going to Iraq is not about freedom, it's not about protecting our country, it's not about anything "noble".. it's about power and control (mostly for oil) and making sure "christ" is put above "ala".. Wake up and smell the naplam, would ya? Don't let your sense of pride and feelings of having been part of "something" cloud your judgment about what Bush is doing, and how he's perfectly willing to kill your brothers for no good reason. Yes, freedom is a good thing to fight and die for.. if it's OUR freedom we're fighting for and protecting, but that's not what's going on here.. AND, in the midst of that, this fucker is PULLING YOUR BENIFITS..and you stand behind him?

Oh.. and Doyle.. the -most important bit-.. We can support the TROOPS 100% -AND- still think this war in Iraq is a farce and needs to end now!.. Can't you see that? this isn't about "the troops" or "supporting" them, this is about Bush not giving a shit about you, your brothers, your children, your parents, no one.. He's sending people off to die for no good reason, and that pisses us off.. mostly BECAUSE we support our troops. They deserve better than what Bush is willing to give them..

this story was the lead on ABC news tonite!
the MSM is waking up, hopefully!

my gut tells me this is really going to start an avalanche of speaking out strongly...

Robert, you said it!

Doyle - we invaded a sovreign country - we are the attackers. Dubya misled us into war. He told us we would not attack Iraq until:

1) Our military was adequately prepared

2) Saddam allowed the US weapons inspectors to complete their inspections

3) The US had been able to form a strong coalition to go with us.

He reneged on all 3 of those.

That's not including bu$h's 52 deceptive statements
leading up to the war that Waxman has collected.

From bush43 Speech in Cincinnati 2002:

"As President Kennedy said in October of 1962, 'Neither the United States of America, nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world,' he said, 'where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nations security to constitute maximum peril.'

Funny thing, eh?

"Neither the United States of America, nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. "

Hellllooooo bushie.

First, thank you for your service to America Doyle. You guys are all heroes to me.
Second, You were fighting communism.
Third, The "enemy" was elusive and unrecognizable. They blended with the population and could never be eliminated because the same people who you worked with during the day were the ones shooting you at night. Which is why you never want to put boots on the ground in an endless civil conflict. The "enemy" can not be rooted out by foreign soldiers. The population of the country must take responsibility of rooting them out. Which is why we need to get the hell out of there and let them get their democracy in order.
Fourth, We have accomplished our mission there. Got rid of Saddam and found no weapons. What are we doing now? Fighting the "enemy" (see above)
and last of all, If we stay we will still be having this conversation five years from now because we cannot possibly kill every nut in the middle east with a desire to strap a bomb to them. So our kids will just continue to be targets.
What will happen when we leave? You and I both heard that in Nam and what did happen? We take vacations there it is so beautiful. Now, my opinion and a buck will get you a cup of coffee, but really what are we accomplishing at this point besides giving them ducks to shoot at?
And I support the troops 110% which is why I think getting out of Iraq is a really good idea.

Kevin Smith: THINK!! Use your head and THINK! Iraq is based on a lie of OIL, they have it, bush/supporters want it! Follow the money - who gains from Iraq? Halliburton and other mega corps AND OIL companies! bush doesn't give a rats ass about democracy. He is certainly destroying here, why would he want democracy there?

Savantster this is my personal oppinion it has nothing to do with bush. Are you a viet nam vet. If not you have no idea what my feeling are. And by the way would you like for me to send you my medals. And by the way i answer to no one. THANKS

And Savanster --- your post wasn't up before I got mine worked out but you said it, too!

Kat #2 --- are you our very own US Air Force veteran Kat L'Estrange? If so, huge hugs!

Great post!

Jo,
I appreciate your comment but how do you fight communism in a country smaller than the state you live in? Thanks :confused:

"We never knew what we were fighting for if it was for rice patties, jungles,mountains or poor people in mud huts."
You were fighting Ho Chi Minh and communist aggression (communism). Lyndon Johnson called it operation rolling thunder.
Is this what you meant?
I live in a big state :0)

Murtha was front and center on ABC News. He makes a powerful case for withdrawal.

My marine nephew has made three trips to the Iraq War. His mother is a nervous wreck. When home, he tells everyone not to allow their children to enlist.

I want every mother's child to have a full life with limbs attached. I want them here to defend this country. I am willing to risk the possibility that some lunatics may slip through the security check.

Doyle,
I have to echo what others have said: it's not about freedom. It's not about liberating anybody. Just because they say it doesn't make it so.
I also support the troops 100%. I don't support a government that doesn't arm them properly & then lies about it, claiming the company that makes the armor couldn't deliver: then that company responded by saying, yes we can, we could have made more, they just didn't ask.
My late husband was a Vietnam vet.
I honor & respect your service, as do most of those who post here. It is BECAUSE of that that we are so deeply offended by a government that lied to the men & women who put their lives on the line for their country. That is betrayal. It is un-American.

I don't know how I really feel about the Immediate withdrawel from Iraq but I do know that I was there from 2003 to 2004 and I saw a lot of things that made me realize that living here in the United States is really a lucky thing for all of us. What really gets to me is that all of you that have never been through a war or even stepped foot into the very same place that you are talking about can sit here and say the things that you say. It's real easy for you to say that we don't need to be over there when you haven't been there, to know how the people are living because they didn't have a good president to even worry if they were gonna live or die the next day. I watched people take baths in mud holes right next to their sheep, watched as kids begged on side of the road for food.
So you sit back in your comfortable chair in your nice house and run down to Burger King when you get a little hungry and talk about your president all you want to......better yet I have a better idea, why don't you move over there and live with the people that "doesn't need rescueing" and then write on here and tell us how it is. I could go on and on about how bad it is over there but I felt good about what I did over there and glad that we took him out of power and I stand behind my president because after all.....we elected him, he didn't force himself into power with a gun.

PS.....good luck getting internet in a mud hut there so you can whine about all of this.

#42 wrote

"...we elected him, he didn't force himself into power with a gun..."

No, we didn't. And they didn't need a gun.

I support the troops 100% but not the mission. Hmmm, then you don't support the troops that believe in their mission. So then you dont support 100% of the troops. So then you dont support the troops 100%. It's ok to not support the troops 100% if that's your belief but don't try to shinola people into thinking you believe otherwise. Y'all support Murtha the guy who voted to kill a bazillion iraqi civilians? He was lying then but he's not lying now? I support you all 100%.

JOAN DID WE DEFEAT COMMUNISM IN VIETNAN AFTER LOSING OVER 50,000 boys? One of which was my neighbor and my assistant gunner and killed only yards from me. By the way #42 is my son in law. (think) military runs deep in my familyand some of them didn,t make it.

#32: Did you protest when we invaded via our air force the sovereign nation of Serbia? If you did, good on ya. If not, why not?

We defected communism in Vietnam???? Did I read that correctly?

Castro - Ahhh, forget it, your not worth the time.

Support the troops, support our principles, dump Bush!

well said #48. Glad to see you support closing the borders and stopping the spendaholic.

Argh ...defeated in #47 and you're in #48. Must be getting late.

Google: "Arrest Bush 41"

fuck bush and all the neocons and bring our troops home from and unjust and immoral war. Its funny how iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and they had no wmd's but we still stay in there. Well of course there could only be one good reason maybe oil. If georgy really wanted to get the terrorists that carried out 9-11 you would think that he would have gone into saudi arabia seing that 15 of the 19 terrorists were from there. But instead i guess he did what anyone would do and smoked cigars with the prince of saudi hmmmmmm. If he is so concerend about wmd's you think he would do something about north korea since they told him that they had them but i guess maybe if they get some oil then we could do somethinh about them

"Are you a viet nam vet. If not you have no idea what my feeling are."

See, now you're saying I can't know anything about Vets cause I'm not a vet.. yet, you don't know anything about me, either. My mom was a counselor for Vietnam vets when I was a teenager. She befriended several vets and I spent a lot of time with them listening to their stories and getting an understanding of how terrible war is. My understanding isn't based on movies like 3-Kings, but more on movies like Platoon.. movies that, from my understanding from vets, is more like the real thing.. with insanity all around. Then you get back here and your country is spitting on you? No, I can't "fully understand your feelings", but I -can- empathize with you to a large degree.

And, again, the -point- is, we're not fighting for "democracy" in Iraq, we've already told them exactly what to put in THEIR Constitution, despite it NOT being what THEY wanted... get it? This conflict, like Vietnam, is turning into a serious sham that is killing innocent soldiers and civilians with no clear plan, no clear strategy, no "victory conditions".. We outed Saddam, we set up their elections and got them a Constitution.. NOW what's our excuse? Can't you understand that question?

Brad at #42, you really should use a different name. It's pretty shitty to come to Brad's blog and use a name that will confuse people. Those of us who frequent here know full well you're not "the Brad", be polite and curtious and use a more distinctive name, if you would. Now, to your post..

"I saw a lot of things that made me realize that living here in the United States is really a lucky thing for all of us."

yes.. and the job of OUR military is to PROTECT US, not wage illegal wars on sovereign nations. Waging war on countries that are not a threat to us is ILLEGAL and goes AGAINST the premis of our Constitution. Your implication that "it's a bad place that needs help" is IGNORANT.. wanna know why? there are MUCH WORSE plases on Earth, but we're not invading them. Places where a LOT MORE PEOPLE ARE DYING AND BEING MURDERED, but we don't go save them.. know why? It's NOT OUR BUSINESS, we can't afford to "save the world alone", and it's ILLEGAL to invade them. Your "point" is noted, but irrelavant.

Man.. I keep starting to write a damn book, but then figure "why bother".. there's SO much info out there, and you obviously don't care, so why should I repeat the info here? Here's the most telling bit that shows you just don't give a shit about knowledge and truth..

"and I stand behind my president because after all.....we elected him, he didn't force himself into power with a gun [fraud with electronic voting machine]."

Your president, maybe. If you voted for him, it shows you have total shit for judgement.. Being sympathetic to those in need doesn't make you smart or right or justified, it makes you compassionate... that's all.. But, MOST of us here are compassionate.. we just care about our families more than making Bush rich.. get it?

The world is a big bad place, Brad (imposter Brad, that is).. Some of us know that, and we are truely saddened by what's going on in the world. BUT, the "fix" is not to invade countries that aren't ready for "capitalism" (which, let's face it, is what we're shoving down their throats there.. THEY wanted a socialism and Iraqi-only run businesses... we fucked that up... What "freedom"? what "democracy"?). The "fix" is to stop the insanely greedy corperate shit-heads who don't mind killing people by the thousands, or perhaps millions, for a good profit. It's "business", after all.. right? Don't let your emotions override your reason.. no one wins that way, trust me.

Castro, your piss poor logic is exactly what has you not understanding anything here..

First, not all troops "support the mission".. have you not seen all the IRAQ CONFLICT VETS that are speaking out against this illegal invasion? I'm guessing.. NO.. cause it would be information that doesn't fit in your preconcieved notion of what is and isn't..

So, if not "all troops" support the "mission", your assertions all go to complete shit. You can't base part of your "proof" on false logic or the entire thing falls apart. Us educated folks understand that.. It's exactly how we know that most of what's going on is bullshit, you can't use lies to support truths.. doesn't work that way.

Basically, if a "soldier" fully believes he's there for "freedom" or "protecting America", I can thank him for his efforts and STILL know he's mistaken about what he's doing. Get it? See, soldiers aren't always the brightest bunch, and the military ENCOURAGES you to NOT THINK.. in fact, you can go to prison for thinking. You follow orders, that's it. So, given that we KNOW that a lot of soldiers "know the truth", but are in Iraq anyway, we have an obligation to "support the troops". That has -nothing- to do with "supporting the mission".. in fact, there IS NO MISSION, but you can't see that. Your pea-brain is stuck on "defending america" depsite the PROVED LIES that made that argument (again, can't have truth based on lies..).. stuck on "bringing democracy to Iraq" despite us NOT letting them have the Constitution THEY WANTED..

At the end of the day, Castro, you are a troll.. someone who simply wants to cause consternation on the board and offer nothing of substance. You think you're quaint, but your laughable (as your little attempt at a logical progression shows). Go away, you're boring me.. Course, we know you won't.. Trolls with thick (and hard) heads just can't learn anything worth learning, and are too stupid to see it (or care)..

Hello,
I am a Viet Nam Era Vet. In the middle-late 1960's there was this belief that if Viet Nam fell to the communists that a "domino effect" would result and all of Southeast Aisa would fall to communism.
This did not happen, however as a result of the "Nixon Doctrine", Cambodia (which was neutral) was bombed... giving rise to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge and the nightmare of the "Killing Fields". Eventually, Viet Nam went in to stop this horror, oust Pol Pots Regime and bring a sence of peace to Cambodia. The U.S denounced this "invasion" by Viet Nam, but one could easily view this as a humanitarian gesture.
I believe that G. W. Bush invaded Iraq to "get back" for Saddam Hussains (failed) attempt on his father's life when the elder Bush visited Kuwait several years after the end of the 1991 Gulf War.
He just needed some plausable "reasons" to do so. If you don't think that this could happen here in this advanced industrial nation I suggest that you research and read something. Look up the Speech to the Reichstag (September 2, 1939) by the Chanceler of Germany. Imagine yourself as a German citizen inside that legislative body. I think that you may feel like the reason for invasion was "justified" then, just as G.W. feels he is now. A.H. was wrong... and so is G.W.B.. -J.D.

#42 i respect your feelings towards the more unfortunate peoples of this world, but if it's a bath and some food they need, a military presence isn't going to help much. there are ways to help people without killing them at the same time. this is a shitty situation we're in, and shame on the ones who use it to their advantage.

To comment #4

It's not like we are being invaded by ships full of terrorists.

Instead of wasting billions and billions of dollars fighting an insurgency that will be never ending in Iraq why not spend the money to secure our borders and start making our Homeland Security the number one priority so that it works!!

#42, the peoples of iraq aren't living in hell because they don't have a good president. they have been bombarded by outside governments for as long as most of them can remember. they have not been given a chance to take control of their own country yet. do you know who put suddam in power in the first place? and why they decided to do it? i believe your heart is in the right place but people in power often take advantage of that.

#42. the president did not force himself into power with a gun but our government helped suddam do just that.

Yes, as sad as would be to admitt "defeat, error in judgement etc." for those brave...valiant soldiers who have lost and suffered from this war. The people of Iraq do not have to fear Saddam Hussain and Baath Party. A mission that was accomplished LONG AGO and celebrated for a short time by many Iraqi's. Now they have to fear the "crossfire" between the insurgency and (mostly) U.S. forces. If we leave, then hopefully the reason for the fighting will be gone. Hopefully the bloodshed in Iraq will end. Mabe then we can build some of the goodwill we enjoyed post 9/11 and pre/ Iraq invasion. -J.D.

#34: Don't waste time on people like him, Mugzi. By now anyone who has a brain to think will know that its no longer the right thing to do to stay longer in Iraq. We all know why, be it domestic in terms of economy and deficit, or the insurgency in Iraq.

Frankly anyone believing we should stay the course in Iraq, for one thing wants more deaths of US troops. Because that is what will happen. In a week, more soldiers will die, this we know.

For another thing, the insurgency is even better than before, and as explicitly said in letters exchanged between leaders of Al-Qaeda and the sub-leaders of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, the invasion of Iraq was a great thing for them.

Remember that when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, it eventually led to the formation of Al Qaeda, led by Osama, who himself fought there. The invasion galvanised the idea of holy warriors defending a muslim country with muslims coming in from neighbouring countries to fight against the invader.

Same thing happening in Iraq right now. These military adventures feed and grow the very organisation that we want to eliminate.

And remember the murderers of 3000 people are still on the loose.

To the fake Brad and the rest of the rightwingers on this thread - why do you insist on speaking for the Iraqis? Here's what the Iraqis have to say:

Poll: Iraqis out of patience

By Cesar G. Soriano and Steven Komarow,USA TODAY

BACK in APRIL 2004

BAGHDAD — Only a third of the Iraqi people now believe that the American-led occupation of their country is doing more good than harm, and a solid majority support an immediate military pullout even though they fear that could put them in greater danger, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll.

Asked whether they view the U.S.-led coalition as "liberators" or "occupiers," 71% of all respondents say "occupiers."

That figure reaches 81% if the separatist, pro-U.S. Kurdish minority in northern Iraq is not included. The negative characterization is just as high among the Shiite Muslims who were oppressed for decades by Saddam as it is among the Sunni Muslims who embraced him.

The growing negative attitude toward the Americans is also reflected in two related survey questions: 53% say they would feel less secure without the coalition in Iraq, but 57% say the foreign troops should leave anyway. Those answers were given before the current showdowns in Fallujah and Najaf between U.S. troops and guerrilla fighters.

...But the hostility reflected in the poll is a message that the troops understand, says Monks, the Marine lance corporal. "They don't want us here," he says. "They want to rebuild their own country. We're trying to Americanize their life. You can't buy love."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Iraq Statistics as of Oct 2005 - Iraqis Want US to Leave

Results of a poll taken in August 2005 of Iraqi citizens by the British Ministry of Defense. Here are a few results....

-- Iraqis "strongly opposed" to presence of coalition troops - 82%

-- Iraqis who believe Coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security - less than 1%

-- Iraqis who feel less secure because of the occupation - 67%

-- Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces - 72%

-- Iraqis who rarely have safe, clean water - 71%

-- Iraqis who never have enough electricity - 47%

Let's see if I have this straight. A majority of Americans are now strongly opposed to the War in Iraq, and want the Bush Administration to start pulling troops out now. A huge majority of Iraqi citizens are vehemently opposed to the continuing occupation of their country by US and other "coalition" troops.

But President George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice rushed the US into an unnecessary, elective war, and now they all say we're staying....maybe for ten more years or so?

WHY ???

That's a very good question.

*More statistics at LINK above*

For Castro: I read somewhere that you've been diagnosed with Parkinson's Disease. My best wishes to you for a speedy recovery.

James #55
Thank you for your service.
I am also a Viet Nam era veteran. Navy, six years. Nursing. I now work at the VA hospital. All of my brothers, My Husband and all my cousins and brothers-in-law went to Viet Nam. My Dad and all of my uncles served in WW2. 90% of the men and about half the women in my family are veterans or are currently serving. Two of my nephews have served in Iraq.
I am not anti-military.
I think we have done as much as we can in Iraq and it's time to go. Yes, I was against the war because I thought it would be better to let the weapons inspectors complete their mission before taking hostile action. We went, we did it and now we are just sitting ducks and we are paying a fortune for the privilege. Will continued violence get people the food, medicine and living conditions they need? I don't see it.
Will we be able to kill every terrorist in the Middle East? I don't see that either.
All that we can accomplish has been accomplished. Time to go and let the international community help the Iraqi's get their country in order. Otherwise we will still be having this conversation five years from now only the death toll will be a whole lot higher.