*Preface*
OK, so I voted Clinton in '92, Nader in '96, Gore in '00, Kerry in '04. I was completely against the Iraq War in the very beginning. Laughed a tragic laugh when Bush donned the flight suit & declared "Mission Accomplished" because I knew it was an outright LIE, just like all of the reasons to declare war. Hated the Bush adminstration, Rummy, etc. etc. Been there done that. I fully blame those who voted for the Republicans for the enormous national debt, the folly of getting started in Iraq back in the day and saying stupid shit like 9/11 was in anyway connected. I don't believe bombing solves anything. Many people would say my political views are "liberal."

But I think I am changing my mind lately on whether troops should withdraw from Iraq. I agree with not policing the world, but now that we have invested at least 4 years in this thing, and from the stuff I have been reading lately. Things have changed since 2003. Hell, the situation has changed since 2005. A lot of really bad shit has happened, with the Abu Ghraib scandal, Guatanamo, Blackwater, you name it. I think that the tide is now changing, and those in charge are being scrutinized to such a degree-- as they should have been from the beginning -- that the tactics in the Iraq War have changed. Soldiers are being used to protect people now. Iraqis are used to them. Al Qaida is fighting there. There are lots of troops who would be slaughtered during the withdrawal, and that there should be a very well-planned, incremental approach to the US withdrawal instead of an absolute deadline. Reason being, that if a strict deadline is imposed by Congress or the next president without a carefully planned withdrawal, all of the weapons that the US has used and the setups that have occurred will fall into the hands of al Qaida, who will used the weapons against ordinary Iraqi citizens, and there will be more tyrranny than Iraq has ever seen, and it will become a training ground for al Qaida.

It frustrates me that US involvement in Iraq created this mess. But we cannot let our sentiments that were fully appropriate in 2003 push our representatives to make another highly erroneous, politically-motivated (rather than safety- and global-security-motivated) decision.

I think that prior to the full withdrawal of troops -- which I fully support, eventually -- we should have a tremendous troop surge to restore some order once and for all, if it is at all possible. I mean a draft. Send 500,000 more over there for the withdrawal, or whatever it takes to say, we mean business, you people learn to have law & order and get along, or you are gonna see a half a million more westerners descend in your space.

Of all the anger that the US has riled up with the first screwup of going to Iraq in the first place, cannot really get worse. Maybe with a final push of worn-out-solider-rescuers/diplomats, we can get this thing done and leave Iraq a slightly better place than it was when we got there.

Comments, questions? ... and if you think I'm nuts, kindly explain why, because these new ideas I'm having come from a place of goodwill and 'let's just fix this big fuckup'.

I was a little unsure about them going in there - not that I think Saddam was a cuddly nice guy - but I certainly believe in the "you helped make the fucking mess, you get no supper until you've cleaned the bloody thing up" policy. Cutting and running would be obscene.

__________________
Time is the distance that you can't return by miles.

I escaped somehow. Let's go

actualy [sic] I have quite a blessed life if I'm honest. I have many people to love, hate few and have few money problem's [sic].... What more does a person need? Oh yeah and I have some kind of humbleness unlike you of course ^_^ ~ CarefulCarpenter

no more troops for war or anything like that pull them out of fight combat and just have all troops over there do humanitarian work and like fix new buildings and ones that are severely damaged over there as is.put the fucking weapons down completely or just leave.

Even though I was against the war to begin with, the idea of "cut and run" doesn't appeal to me either. I hope whoever the next president is will be able to get more cooperation from countries in the region. Bush really doesn't project a sense of trust or sound judgment. What country would want to help him clean up his mess?

I don't think that would work ... what's it gonna accomplish, you can't change their minds with more troops, you can't make em into Americans and change their values or much of anything, more troops can't make them 'learn,' you can only keep em under lock and key for as long as the troops are there ...

Get along or else ... won't cut it. First off, people resent being bullied. When will Americans realize this?! Whatever yer intentions and believe me, they are not all good, the people don't want you over there. Second, they know Americans don't have the will to back it up. The Americans are getting bled dry economically ... They knew the Americans would pull out ... and that's what they are doing, or will do soon.

And the cost of sending that many troops and keeping them there for any length of time ... it's the same mistake but bigger ... My God ... the Canadian dollar is gonna be with 5 USA bucks after that! You Americans gotta start looking after yer home ... forget the rest of the world, let it sort itself out ... live within yer means! ... go easy on the oil ... Put all this war money into developing alternative sources, stop voting in oil barons and their pals! Political change is needed ... IN THE USA.

Age old hates don't die ... More troops won't erase bitter history ...

Ok I'm preaching, I know ......

Maybe Iran could pitch in? I bet they'd rather fancy having a go at throwing their weight around in Iraq. US and Iran, arm in arm? Sexy. Not that they have any gays.

__________________
Time is the distance that you can't return by miles.

I escaped somehow. Let's go

actualy [sic] I have quite a blessed life if I'm honest. I have many people to love, hate few and have few money problem's [sic].... What more does a person need? Oh yeah and I have some kind of humbleness unlike you of course ^_^ ~ CarefulCarpenter

Iran already is pitching in. In spite of all the rhetoric about its nuclear program, they've assisted us in Afghanistan and have offered help in Iraq.
Iran has made secret overtures to the US about its nuke program and other issues. They've even offered to recognize Israel! But Bush has ignored these offers. Bush seems hell bent on starting another war.

Aw poor USA ... they wanna boss everybody around and start wars but they don't got the money or the soldiers..... Oops......

Why is everyone so surprised?

I stated from the beginning that the United States is not going to win this terrorist war just like the U.S. is not winning the drug war...

I don’t like to talk about it because American only likes to hear things they want to hear. Example: U.S. is winning the war and just needs another trillion dollars to finance war…

Thank you. I feel like the US mission in Iraq has made a huge mess of the infrastructure and increased the tension in Iraqi society. It would be obscene to just cut and run from the destruction & mayhem. We have a duty to clean up the mess. AND NOT INVADE ELSEWHERE until the mess is cleaned up.

Exactly.

Were you really against the invasion? I thought you supported it at first. I might be confusing this with your stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict though.

Well, again my thoughts are that the Iraqi populace was shocked & upset at first (in 03), and now they're probably just weary. They are used to the occupation by now. The additional troops at this point would be more along the line of peacekeepers, which is the direction that the occupation has moved into. They are no longer blasting villages with napalm (er, excuse me -- the new stuff that they don't call napalm anymore but effectively does the same thing).

The hate they have for the US can't get worse with the new "protection" strategy. the troops that have been there for so long now are getting to know people in the villages they occupy. I don't believe that they are treating every Iraqi as an enemy, like they did at first.

The additional troops would offer additional protection for the FULL WITHDRAWAL.

You might not be aware of this, but when the insurgents become aware of the US plan for withdrawal -- which will be inevitably announced throughout the international news media -- there will be a tremendous surge in casualties. The additional troops are needed to discourage these attacks.

It is not an expansion of the war, or the area of occupation, so I disagree with your arguments about increasing problems. It will decrease them. Also, this is not intended to "change their minds" -- but to discourage attacks upon withdrawal. Right now, if we left all of the US weapons cached there, they would be used by Iraqis on each other after the troops are gone. Kurds versus Sunni versus Shia.... It would be completely irresponsible to withdraw quickly and without a well-laid plan, just to appease thay sector of Bush haters who are also naive and mushyheaded. I too support bringing the troops home, but you have to know the difference between a half-assed "bring the troops home now" and "let's have an exit strategy that makes sense."

I totally cringe about the expense of the war. I blame the Bush administration for the careless cost overruns. But I think it will be more expensive in the long run if America fucks up the exit strategy (in the same way that it fucked up the invasion in the first place). The Bush admin went in without a plan. Expensive. It would be another mistake to come out without a GOOD PLAN.

Who are you?

I mean, I for SURE did not support the US invasion. But somehow, all that part of my message got completely ignored.

Nope. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan. The invasion of Iraq never made sense to me.

I don't see how.

Maybe your confusing my admiration for Christopher Hitchens' atheistic views with his support of the invasion of Iraq.

Oh they had a plan. A really bad plan.

Put down the weapons? How do you expect them to affect any peacekeeping or humanitarian work without weapons/protection? You want the doctors and nurses delivering medical aid and workers involved in reconstruction to do their work without protection? How do you suppose this? You might as well condemn them to death.

__________________
You fell down of course, and then you got up of course and started over. Forgot my name of course, then you started to remember.

I think so. I don't think it was totally a case of "let's go in and, like, just see what happens, play it by ear, have some fun". Just partly...

__________________
Time is the distance that you can't return by miles.

I escaped somehow. Let's go

actualy [sic] I have quite a blessed life if I'm honest. I have many people to love, hate few and have few money problem's [sic].... What more does a person need? Oh yeah and I have some kind of humbleness unlike you of course ^_^ ~ CarefulCarpenter

I think Bush and company were expecting the fun part. They were expecting dancing in the streets.