So much for "The Quagmire"

[tml12]

Let's cut to the chase shall we? Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln May 1, 2003, announcing an end to major combat (under a huge sign MISSION ACCOMPLISHED). In his first debate with Al Gore, he stated that in the case of a war, a clear exit strategy needed to be in place PRIOR to war. This man is 100% responsible for the ongoing mess in Iraq. Add the above to his handling of Katrina, his crony appointments, and his staff scandals and you have an incompetent leader whose actions has cost 1000's of lives. Bush and his adminstration epitomizes the word quagmire.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A classic example of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your estimate, how many more years will the US have troops in Iraq?

[GostHacked]

Let's cut to the chase shall we? Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln May 1, 2003, announcing an end to major combat (under a huge sign MISSION ACCOMPLISHED). In his first debate with Al Gore, he stated that in the case of a war, a clear exit strategy needed to be in place PRIOR to war. This man is 100% responsible for the ongoing mess in Iraq. Add the above to his handling of Katrina, his crony appointments, and his staff scandals and you have an incompetent leader whose actions has cost 1000's of lives. Bush and his adminstration epitomizes the word quagmire.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A classic example of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your estimate, how many more years will the US have troops in Iraq?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what the military advisors say and other anylists, they figure at this rate at least 5 more years....

And this is looking more like a quagmire. Japan was not a quagmire after WWII, they surendered and then the reform began. Same with Germany.

You hade sizable forces on each side of the coin during WWII, that is why they called it WWII, for a good deal of the worlds contries were fighting one side or the other. In Iraq, you have the US, Britian and the so called Coalition of the Willing but cannot contribute anything (military or money) to the invasion of Iraq. It is a quagmire. Spain pulled out, as well with a few other contries that only had a couple hundred (or less) troops helping out.

I do hope Iraq will be free and I hope this will all be worth it, but I am kind of a pessimist, for when you are crawling through the tunnel, and you see the light, but it is faint, then the tunnel collapses in front of you. Could be a long time before any see that light at the end of the tunnel.

Mission Accomplished : On board an aircraft carrier off the coast of San Diego (I think) He was not in the gulf when that stunt was pulled. There would not have been enough security in the Gulf to ensure that political stunt would go according to plan.

Let's say they DO get a working government in the next year. One that is recognized by the international community. Then what. Could it all fall apart after the troops withdraw? Who will take care of their security? The Iraqi forces are just not ready nor properly equipped to handle the job once the US leaves.

Unless the US sells them alot of weapons to maintain the order... wait a minute. Could be part of the plan, invade, FSU (fuck shit up) train, withdraw and leave, then you have a perfect staging ground for the invasion of Iran, Syria, Isreal ect.

I did not have faith in their words when they went in. 'It will be all over in 2 years maximum." now the rhetoric is ... " could be 10+ years." This in itself is admitting to the quagmire.

[tml12]

Let's cut to the chase shall we? Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln May 1, 2003, announcing an end to major combat (under a huge sign MISSION ACCOMPLISHED). In his first debate with Al Gore, he stated that in the case of a war, a clear exit strategy needed to be in place PRIOR to war. This man is 100% responsible for the ongoing mess in Iraq. Add the above to his handling of Katrina, his crony appointments, and his staff scandals and you have an incompetent leader whose actions has cost 1000's of lives. Bush and his adminstration epitomizes the word quagmire.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A classic example of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your estimate, how many more years will the US have troops in Iraq?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what the military advisors say and other anylists, they figure at this rate at least 5 more years....

And this is looking more like a quagmire. Japan was not a quagmire after WWII, they surendered and then the reform began. Same with Germany.

You hade sizable forces on each side of the coin during WWII, that is why they called it WWII, for a good deal of the worlds contries were fighting one side or the other. In Iraq, you have the US, Britian and the so called Coalition of the Willing but cannot contribute anything (military or money) to the invasion of Iraq. It is a quagmire. Spain pulled out, as well with a few other contries that only had a couple hundred (or less) troops helping out.

I do hope Iraq will be free and I hope this will all be worth it, but I am kind of a pessimist, for when you are crawling through the tunnel, and you see the light, but it is faint, then the tunnel collapses in front of you. Could be a long time before any see that light at the end of the tunnel.

Mission Accomplished : On board an aircraft carrier off the coast of San Diego (I think) He was not in the gulf when that stunt was pulled. There would not have been enough security in the Gulf to ensure that political stunt would go according to plan.

Let's say they DO get a working government in the next year. One that is recognized by the international community. Then what. Could it all fall apart after the troops withdraw? Who will take care of their security? The Iraqi forces are just not ready nor properly equipped to handle the job once the US leaves.

Unless the US sells them alot of weapons to maintain the order... wait a minute. Could be part of the plan, invade, FSU (fuck shit up) train, withdraw and leave, then you have a perfect staging ground for the invasion of Iran, Syria, Isreal ect.

I did not have faith in their words when they went in. 'It will be all over in 2 years maximum." now the rhetoric is ... " could be 10+ years." This in itself is admitting to the quagmire.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The fact of the matter is you can't win a war if you don't win the peace.

In this war, there was no plan to win the peace. The Bush administration anticipated that Iraqis would be 100% supportive of removing Saddam and welcoming the Americans.

The fact is, it is very difficult to democratically win the peace in a country that is as religiously diverse as Iraq.

Right now, the Sunnis are unhappy. Soon, someone else will be unhappy. How you explain things democratically here?

This is a war that was a logisitcal failure on all ends.

[Montgomery Burns]

Let's cut to the chase shall we? Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln May 1, 2003, announcing an end to major combat (under a huge sign MISSION ACCOMPLISHED). In his first debate with Al Gore, he stated that in the case of a war, a clear exit strategy needed to be in place PRIOR to war. This man is 100% responsible for the ongoing mess in Iraq. Add the above to his handling of Katrina, his crony appointments, and his staff scandals and you have an incompetent leader whose actions has cost 1000's of lives. Bush and his adminstration epitomizes the word quagmire.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A classic example of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your estimate, how many more years will the US have troops in Iraq?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what the military advisors say and other anylists, they figure at this rate at least 5 more years....

And this is looking more like a quagmire. Japan was not a quagmire after WWII, they surendered and then the reform began. Same with Germany.

You hade sizable forces on each side of the coin during WWII, that is why they called it WWII, for a good deal of the worlds contries were fighting one side or the other. In Iraq, you have the US, Britian and the so called Coalition of the Willing but cannot contribute anything (military or money) to the invasion of Iraq. It is a quagmire. Spain pulled out, as well with a few other contries that only had a couple hundred (or less) troops helping out.

I do hope Iraq will be free and I hope this will all be worth it, but I am kind of a pessimist, for when you are crawling through the tunnel, and you see the light, but it is faint, then the tunnel collapses in front of you. Could be a long time before any see that light at the end of the tunnel.

Mission Accomplished : On board an aircraft carrier off the coast of San Diego (I think) He was not in the gulf when that stunt was pulled. There would not have been enough security in the Gulf to ensure that political stunt would go according to plan.

Let's say they DO get a working government in the next year. One that is recognized by the international community. Then what. Could it all fall apart after the troops withdraw? Who will take care of their security? The Iraqi forces are just not ready nor properly equipped to handle the job once the US leaves.

Unless the US sells them alot of weapons to maintain the order... wait a minute. Could be part of the plan, invade, FSU (fuck shit up) train, withdraw and leave, then you have a perfect staging ground for the invasion of Iran, Syria, Isreal ect.

I did not have faith in their words when they went in. 'It will be all over in 2 years maximum." now the rhetoric is ... " could be 10+ years." This in itself is admitting to the quagmire.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The fact of the matter is you can't win a war if you don't win the peace.

In this war, there was no plan to win the peace. The Bush administration anticipated that Iraqis would be 100% supportive of removing Saddam and welcoming the Americans.

The fact is, it is very difficult to democratically win the peace in a country that is as religiously diverse as Iraq.

Right now, the Sunnis are unhappy. Soon, someone else will be unhappy. How you explain things democratically here?

This is a war that was a logisitcal failure on all ends.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Win the peace"? You sound like John Kerry. Bush has a plan to win the peace--it's called victory.

How anyone could complain that an easy military victory, welcomed by the Iraqis, few US/Coalition and civilian casualties, and in 2-1/2 years have free elections and a free vote on a Constitution they wrote themselves--guaranteeing freedom of speech, the press and religion - is a failure is incredible.

[Montgomery Burns]

Let's cut to the chase shall we? Bush stood on the USS Abraham Lincoln May 1, 2003, announcing an end to major combat (under a huge sign MISSION ACCOMPLISHED). In his first debate with Al Gore, he stated that in the case of a war, a clear exit strategy needed to be in place PRIOR to war. This man is 100% responsible for the ongoing mess in Iraq. Add the above to his handling of Katrina, his crony appointments, and his staff scandals and you have an incompetent leader whose actions has cost 1000's of lives. Bush and his adminstration epitomizes the word quagmire.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A classic example of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your estimate, how many more years will the US have troops in Iraq?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your estimate, now many more years will the US have troops in Bosnia?

Clinton said one year. 1996 seems so long ago.

[tml12]

In your estimate, how many more years will the US have troops in Iraq?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your estimate, now many more years will the US have troops in Bosnia?

Clinton said one year. 1996 seems so long ago.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are quick witted Mr. Burns but I am not a huge fan of Clinton either.

Winning the peace means keeping a majority of Iraqis on your side all the time. However, the Iraqis would rather not have Saadam or the Americans in their country.

BTW I never hear the Bosnians complain about US troops in their country...but my estimate to my own question is that the US will have a prescence in Iraq for at least 50-75 more years.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear tml12,

but my estimate to my own question is that the US will have a prescence in Iraq for at least 50-75 more years.

Actually, the US has said that they were going to maintain bases in Iraq 'in perpetuity'.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0930/p17s02-cogn.html

[Black Dog]

Until US forces exit...

So Germany, Japan, south Korea, and other countries that have US troops are quagmires?

Willful ignorance. Obviously, the U.S. isn't involved in combat in those countries, nor is their prescence necessary for maintaining security for the domestic governments. Unlike Iraq.

This is a classic example of why posters should refrain from feeding the obvious trolls.

In other news...

Huge majority of Iraqis want coalition to go

According to confidential reports leaked to today's newspapers...nearly half of all Iraqis sympathised with violent attacks against British and US coalition troops.

...

The figures on Iraqis' views about attacks on coalition troops came from a nationwide opinion survey, commissioned by the Ministry of Defence and leaked to the Sunday Telegraph

According to the report, fewer than one in 100 respondents felt the presence of American, British and other allied troops was improving security in the country.

Forty-five per cent countrywide were said to believe that the attacks on the troops were justified - a figure that rose to 65 per cent in the Maysan, one of the provinces policed by the British. No fewer than 82 per cent, according to the report, declared themselves 'strongly opposed' to the presence of coalition troops.

Developing...

[Black Dog]

Referendum hangs in the balance

Two Sunni-dominated provinces in Iraq have rejected the country's draft constitution, according to partial results given by election officials.

Electoral rules mean the document will fail if three out of the 18 provinces vote "No" by two-thirds or more.

Salahuddin and Anbar both heavily voted against but Diyala, also Sunni, has backed the charter.

Now all eyes are on the largely Sunni province of Nineveh where the result is due to be announced within two days.

...

Nineveh has a religiously and ethnically mixed population, dominated by Sunni Muslims.

In the immediate aftermath of the referendum, election officials in the provincial capital, Mosul, were quoted by an international news agency as saying the "Yes" vote had won by a huge majority.

Most impartial observers were perplexed and perturbed, the BBC's Richard Galpin reports, as the word on the street seemed to be that the majority had in fact voted "No".

But it was not clear, our correspondent adds, if the "No" voters had mustered two-thirds.

Nineveh is one of the provinces under investigation by election officials. They are looking at voting procedures, the ballot boxes and the ballot papers to ensure there were no mistakes or fraud.

[tml12]

Dear tml12,

but my estimate to my own question is that the US will have a prescence in Iraq for at least 50-75 more years.

Actually, the US has said that they were going to maintain bases in Iraq 'in perpetuity'.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0930/p17s02-cogn.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thank you...I figured I was right.

[I Miss Trudeau]

Dear tml12,

but my estimate to my own question is that the US will have a prescence in Iraq for at least 50-75 more years.

Actually, the US has said that they were going to maintain bases in Iraq 'in perpetuity'.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0930/p17s02-cogn.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

One day Iraq will be the shining success that Saudi Arabia now is.

[Black Dog]

With the countdown towards 2,000 U.S. dead on, the Bush administration is trying to head off more criticism by, once again, trying to explain what they're doing there.

Anticipating a barrage of criticism when the death toll hits 2,000, Bush will try to put the sacrifice in perspective by portraying the Iraq war as the best way to keep terrorists from striking the United States again, the official said. He will make the same case in another speech Friday in Norfolk.

Iraq, I guess, is suppossed to be like Afghanistan in the 1980's: a focal point of terrorist activity and radical ideaology. And certainly nothing bad came of that...

[Shakeyhands]

How do we explain a theocratic democracy vs a democracy? Or am I off here, what is being set up in Iraq in plan english?