Bush's new Iraq plan coming in new year

Truthmonger

THC wrote:

Ohhh Ohhh....I can't wait!

I heard he is going to read a children's book to Congress! maybe that same one he read during 9/11. That seemed to be a good solution....

And maybe this time he'll turn the book right-side-up in order that he can actually read what's on the pages !!!

mammasan

Cosmo wrote:

...
I think you hit the nail on the head with this one.
I believe Bush is more concerned with how HE will be viewed, rather than how AMERICA turns out in the future. Which is why I suspect that the 'New Way Forward' is on the 'Same Old Course'. Bush really believes that if only the American people had he 'resolve' to stick it out... in the long run, the entire Middle East (50 years from now) will resemble Iowa and Nebraska. That the losses we are seeing today are acceptable costs for the long term results. I believe he sees himself as one of the great Americans and that the things we are witnessing in Iraq today are merely minor setbacks... which is why his mouth pieces speak of tough battles in Europe and the Pacific and compares them (unrealistically) to events in Iraq.
The problem is... this is not Europe and Japan and it isn't 1942. We are not talking about nationalism here... we are talking about idealism. The whole thought of spreading Democracy to a region that believes the United States is the worst Empire in the history of the world is probably going to result in them freely electing people who hate us. Look at the recent 'Democratic Elections' in the region... Gaza elects Hamas, Lebanon elects Hezbollah and Iraq elects followers of Al Sadr. You really have to be a complete idiot to have not seen this one coming. And the last place you want a Democratic Election... Pakistan.
The only way to 'Win' in Iraq... 350,000 to 400,000 U.S. troops to overwhelmingly occupy and impose security in that place. That many troops can provide the security needed in order for all of the other factors to take place. The rebuilding effort, the political stability and establishment and the trainning of a quality force in Iraq will only come if there is security over there. Securing the borders, providing the intelligence and executing the military objectives to get the insurgency to subside requires more quality soldiers. Is America ready and willing to place an additional 160,000 to 260,000 U.S. soldiers at risk for a people who inheirently hate us?
As long as things remain at current levels... the sames results will occur.

I completely agree with you and Uncle Leo on this. The fact that, during the first meeting Bush had with both party leaders on the Iraq Study Group report, Bush kept comparing himself to Truman and his legacyonly goes to show that his priority is his legacy. If the man was truely concerned with the best possible outcome for Iraq we would have changed course a long time ago and not waited till we where almost 4 years into this war to finally start making some changes. It hasbeen pretty obvious to just about everyone that the plan of action we where executing has not been working for about 3 years now.

RockinInCanada

mammasan wrote:

I completely agree with you and Uncle Leo on this. The fact that, during the first meeting Bush had with both party leaders on the Iraq Study Group report, Bush kept comparing himself to Truman and his legacyonly goes to show that his priority is his legacy. If the man was truely concerned with the best possible outcome for Iraq we would have changed course a long time ago and not waited till we where almost 4 years into this war to finally start making some changes. It hasbeen pretty obvious to just about everyone that the plan of action we where executing has not been working for about 3 years now.

Yeah but not obvious for some.....

mammasan

Rockin'InCanada wrote:

Yeah but not obvious for some.....

I think it was obvious to the administration, but their pride and/or ego got in the way. Bush may be admired as a man who sticks to his guns, but being a man also means admitting when you where wrong and that is something this president has an extremely hard time doing. The handling of this war has been a text book example of utter failure and I believe Bush & co. know this but for some unkown reason they have been unwilling to publicaly admit this and address the mistakes. It is ridiculous that the war has been carried out in this manner for so long before something was even attempted to rectify the mistakes. For god's sake we where in and out of World War II in less time.

RockinInCanada

mammasan wrote:

I think it was obvious to the administration, but their pride and/or ego got in the way. Bush may be admired as a man who sticks to his guns, but being a man also means admitting when you where wrong and that is something this president has an extremely hard time doing. The handling of this war has been a text book example of utter failure and I believe Bush & co. know this but for some unkown reason they have been unwilling to publicaly admit this and address the mistakes. It is ridiculous that the war has been carried out in this manner for so long before something was even attempted to rectify the mistakes. For god's sake we where in and out of World War II in less time.

Yeah his ego got the best of him....same thing that has got to the rest of his supporters....he's an ass and will be remember as one....to me that would be a great legacy for this man.....

binger

Our little chimp doesn't have a plan. There are 2 options for him. Pull out or add more troops. If we pull out, Saudi Arabia has said that they will back the Sunnis which means we have a proxy/civil war cause the Iranians will back the Shia. Not sure we can add more troops without a draft...not a very popular idea in the states. If THIS government tells me I have to pick up a gun, I'll pick it up. They aren't going to like who it's pointed at though. What a fucking mess.

Cosmo

binger wrote:

Our little chimp doesn't have a plan. There are 2 options for him. Pull out or add more troops. If we pull out, Saudi Arabia has said that they will back the Sunnis which means we have a proxy/civil war cause the Iranians will back the Shia. Not sure we can add more troops without a draft...not a very popular idea in the states. If THIS government tells me I have to pick up a gun, I'll pick it up. They aren't going to like who it's pointed at though. What a fucking mess.

...
Yeah... it's some fucked up shit we're in.
The problem with sending in more troops is that it creates problems as well as solves them. The greater number of troops looks like occupation... which, it basically is. A Military Occupation in Arab land does not sit well with them.
BUT... the greater numbers are required to fulfill the security needs in the country. It is a solution that creates problems and we have to weigh the pros and cons regarding that decision.
As for pulling out... that is basically us saying, "Fuck it"... this was a lame ass fucking idea in the first place and the mother fucker that made the call should be strung up by his balls. Sounds like a good plan to me.

ThumbingMyWay32

Bush is stupid.

Cosmo

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

Bush is stupid.

...
I don't know about being stupid...
BUT, I DO believe he should be held accountable for his actions. This is HIS war and he should own up to it.

bryanfury

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

Bush is stupid.

sometimes the simplist answer is the right one...